‘This is my destiny’

How one man gave up everything—his family, his friends, his job—to spread the Truth about 9/11

by Jonathan Kay

'This is my destiny'

Steve Ludlum/The New York Times/Redux

In Among the Truthers, his wide-ranging look at conspiracist thinking on everything from the 9/11 attacks to the causes of autism, journalist Jonathan Kay is less interested in what the conspiracies proclaim than in examining how modern society lost its “consensual view of reality.” As part of that effort, Kay considers the various paths individual conspiracists have followed, and in this excerpt relates his interactions with one very persuasive truther, a popular speaker on the 9/11 conspiracy convention circuit, in the grip of a mid-life crisis.

Of all the truther headliners I’ve seen, the very best is Richard Gage, a balding, mild-mannered, middle-aged architect who heads up a California-based group called Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. I’ve heard Gage speak three times in three different cities. At each event, the response was rapturous. At a 2009 lecture in Montreal, his crowd sat mesmerized as he spoke for three straight hours—on a night when the Montreal Canadiens were contesting a playoff game, no less. At a speech in New York City a few months later, the audience burst into a spontaneous chant of “Ri-chard! Richard!” Blushing and grinning like an earnest, overgrown schoolboy, Gage blurted out: “Your enthusiasm knocks my socks off!”

His singular focus—laboriously examined in a 600-slide PowerPoint presentation he trots out at every opportunity—is the precise sequence of events leading to the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings. Avoiding speculation on the Pentagon attacks and the machinations of the Bush White House is critical to the mission of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, he says. “We’re building and technical professionals,” Gage tells his audiences. “We’re not conspiracy theorists.” Gage inevitably elicits emotional gasps and shouts with his slide show. In Montreal, a couple sitting behind me seemed particularly moved. “How can those murderers sleep at night after what they’ve done?” one exclaimed. (She wasn’t talking about al-Qaeda.) Even my own guest, a conservative-minded 65-year-old woman, seemed transfixed, falling silent at points where I expected she’d be chortling and rolling her eyes.

Before beginning his presentation in Montreal, Gage had polled the crowd on their views. Five people, including me and my guest, said they believed the “official theory” of 9/11. Ten others said they were “unsure.” Everyone else—about 200 people—said they believed the WTC came down through “controlled demolition.” Once Gage had finished, he conducted a second poll. This time, when he asked how many people supported the “official theory,” mine was the only hand raised. Shocked, I cast a glance at the friend sitting beside me.

After three hours in a room with Richard Gage, she’d changed her vote to “not sure.”

A few months later, when I sat down with Gage at a Starbucks in the upscale bedroom community of Lafayette, Calif., I wasn’t sure what to expect. Gage is affable and disarming when surrounded by admirers. But like many cultish true believers, he can become emotionally erratic when his views are probed. During our preceding email exchange, he’d interpreted one of my questions as an “indirect threat” on his life—and furiously threatened to cancel our interview.

But Gage arrived in a calm, friendly mood. After buying himself a soy latte, he sat with me on a bench outside the café for two hours, patiently describing his transformation from workaday commercial architect to 9/11 Truth evangelist. It was in March 2006 that his life changed, Gage tells me. He was in his car just after lunch, fighting traffic en route to a construction meeting. Bored, he flipped on KPFA 94.1 FM, a listener-supported station out of Berkeley—“to hear what the communists were talking about.”

Up to that point in life, Gage recalls, he’d been just your average workaday architect, with a wife, child, and a strong Republican voting record. “I believed strongly in America,” he tells me. “I believed everything was okay. When Colin Powell was giving his Iraq evidence at the United Nations [in March 2003], I was cheering him on. I wanted us to go to war in Iraq. I wanted to find the WMD. I was completely on board. I was the poster child for George W. Bush’s foreign policy.”

But all that would change.

The voice he heard on KPFA’s airwaves belonged to David Ray Griffin, a retired Claremont School of Theology professor who’s since become a full-time 9/11 Truth activist. “Griffin was logical and methodical—almost grandfatherly,” Gage remembers. “He was talking about the 118 [World Trade Center] first-responders—information that had just come out in 2005—who said they’d heard explosions and flashes of light, beams dripping with molten metal, all amid the collapse of 80,000 tons of structural steel. It hit me like a two-by-four. How come I’d never heard of any of this? I was shocked. I had to pull my car off the road to absorb it all. I knew I’d be late for the meeting. But I didn’t care.”

Within days, Gage was proselytizing the Truth to everyone who would listen—his family, his friends, even his architectural colleagues at the Walnut Creek, Calif., firm of Akol & Yoshii. He even began setting up booths at American Institute of Architects meetings, where he’d play video footage of the World Trade Center buildings coming down, and invite skeptical onlookers to sign his AE-911Truth petition, which demands a “truly independent investigation” of the 9/11 attacks. Catcalls and mockery were common, Gage remembers—but he didn’t care.

In 2007, Gage cut back on his day job—designing the Summerlin Center Mall in Las Vegas—so that he could spend more time on his activism. Then, in 2008, the project went bankrupt amid the nosediving real estate market, and Gage suddenly was unemployed. Looking back, he says, it was a blessing in disguise: “Making money for large corporations like General Growth was a lot less fulfilling than bringing the truth to people.” Since then, he’s become a full-time truther, just like Griffin, delivering 9/11 sermons at events across North America.

Gage will admit that he’s paid a price. Friends who failed to embrace his missionary zeal have drifted away. So has his wife, who he said had difficulty accepting his “dark” vision. Gage now lives by himself in a home office near Berkeley, paying his bills with the modest amounts he earns through donations. Yet when Gage discusses all this, he seems curiously upbeat—almost euphoric—like a Benedictine monk who’s happily renounced the material encumbrances of secular life. Although he doesn’t talk much about his world before 9/11 Truth, he clearly remembers it as empty and unsatisfying.

“I would rather die speaking the truth than live in a police state, which is what 9/11 set the groundwork for,” he tells me in a final, slightly manic flourish. “I can’t have my son—or grandchildren—ask me, ‘What did you do to stop it?’—and I say, ‘I tried to talk to some architects but they wouldn’t listen.’

“I’ve never been happier. I feel blessed, in fact. This is my destiny, my mission. I’ve lost my career. I’ve lost my marriage. I’ve lost my house. But I’m working with patriots, spreading the truth about what’s happened to their country. What more could I ask?”

Excerpted from Among the Truthers by Jonathan Kay, Copyright 2011, by permission of HarperCollins Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.




Browse

‘This is my destiny’

  1. Having been reared and rewarded in and by the modern secular society built thanks to generous applications of skepticism, Mr. Kay finds himself bemused that others would consider being skeptical about the results.  Being true to form, he attempts to counter-act their skepticism by being skeptical of their claims.

    • Jonathan Kay is not bemused by the scepticism of the conspiracy theorists about the validity of official information but rather by their utter lack of scepticism of their own world view. In fact, truthers cannot be sceptics for that would require an attitude that rejects claims to certainty. 

      • My, my, what a nice little work-a-round you have written!  Avoid any discussion about the claims by framing the discussion as one of the sanity of the people making the claim.  And I really like your last sentence, too.  Suggesting that they can’t really be skeptics, because they haven’t achieved a state of nihilism also suggests that they aren’t fit like what passes for the elite opinion makers.

        • Glad you liked it. Too bad you didn’t read it, it would have made your compliment so much more sincere. 
          Scepticism or lack thereof has nothing to do with sanity or insanity, which is a word that I didn’t use, but with dogmatism or lack of dogmatism. 
          I don’t think truthers and conspiracy theorists are insane, I think the’re fools. 
          And like the preacher who knocks on my door telling me I can’t be happy without Jesus, they will politely and firmly be told to go away.

          •  Psst, Lucien, come ‘ere.  Look, nobody is reading this stuff, so, as a favour to you, let me point out a thing or two…
            Dogma is the process, so the claimants make, of scientifically establishing the veracity of Christian revelation by the RCC.
            Dogmatism is a pejorative term coined by the Protestants as an expression of their skepticism of the RCC’s claim to be authoritative on matters of theology.  And we all know how that worked out for the RCC, don’t we? 
            See the irony?  You’re suggesting that the Truthers are a dogmatic believers incapable of true skepticism, and the Truthers are staking out the ground that the official statement on the mater (=dogma, latin root to teach) leaves much to be desired and that one should therefore be skeptical of the official claims.  
            I know, I know, it’s a real knee-slapper when you juxtapose the current events against the historical origins of the terms you use to defend yourself.  Now, I would never suggest that this makes you look foolish…

          • Thanks for the little lesson on the origins of the word dogma and its derivatives. 
            Forgive me my ignorance: when Kant thanked Hume for having woken him from his dogmatic slumber, I didn’t know it was one of those religious things.   It would be foolish of me, no?  to maybe point out that the meaning of words evolve over the centuries, and one could miss the irony of using the word as it is generally understood today without knowing its etymology. But what the hell, why not.  It’s not like I’m using my real name, am I. Now that would be really foolish!
            Oh by the way, to avoid a future faux pas, and not being in the know, I must ask: how did it work out for the Roman Catholic Church anyway?

          • Isn’t using a fake name great!?  Nothing works better for irritating some species of posters.  I’d never go back.  
            Nach meanings drift over time, but original use was just dripping with germane irony in this context. 
            Nice Kant reference, btw.  
            You are on your own, though, if you are really so ignorant of European history as to not know how it went for the RCC.  You do your credibility great harm if you have not even that knowledge to draw upon in understanding our modern circumstance. 

          • I’m not at all familiar with the use of irritation as a way of  better understanding our modern circumstance. Scepticism yes; irony, germane or otherwise, not so much (it’s lost on the ignorant, sorry I could not appreciate yours). So this is how it ends, then… I’m left alone standing in the cold, my credibility shot, by my own ignorance no less.  Is changing one’s name a complicated process? 

          • For you amusement:
            Dokein: Greek for think; to have an opinion; suppose… the root of…
            orthodoxy: approved opinion
            heterodoxy: not in accord with accepted opinion
            paradoxical: contrary to accepted opinion
            dogma: authoritative system of principles
            dogmatic: asserting opinions in a dictatorial  manner
            dogmatism: dogmatic assertion in matters of opinion.
             

      •  I’ve never met a more skeptical crowd than people who question both the corporate media and government- it’s the beauty of democracy- it ferrets our corruption – and 9/11 truthers tops the list of some the best skeptics I have ever met.

        • Good skeptics are rational and fact-oriented, Richard, and the 9/11 “truth movement” is neither. Gage is a prolific liar who gets caught constantly, but is completely undeterred.  

          • Albury Smith spends all his time trolling 911 wherever he can find it online. A Cass Sunstein spambot that fills the National Post with filth.
            Albury ,it’s funny watching you still try and defend the Big Lie.
            Pretty soon you will be one of the only people left on the planet.

          • The article here isn’t about me; it’s about Richard Gage, and I’ve posted numerous reasons for questioning Richard Gage’s nonsense. Please feel free to read and discuss them. 

          • No one. Who pays you?

          • Albury, you’re on every website talking about 9/11.  You support the Govt and their findings, and deny any of the real evidence.  You are a troll.  You are a disgrace.  Hopefully you are a robot.

            http://www.RememberBuilding7.org
            Stand with Isaac Newton.
            Stand with 9/11 Families.
            Stand for the Truth.

          • “Hopefully” you plan to become better informed than you are presently. You have little to add to the NIST engineers’ or my understanding of Newtonian physics, and wouldn’t be reading truther nut web sites if you were interested in real evidence.

          •  as evidenced by his inordinate amount of arguing against something he doesnt believe in, ( a quick google for albury smith 911 will show a history of his commenting on every blog concerning 911, posting the same lies, distortions and obfuscations ad nauseam, 24/7 ) this shows that he is either paid to do this or has severe mental disabilities, as pointed out by most everyone who has the misfortune to have ever crossed paths with the unflushable turd, and is as obvious as is the explosive destruction of the 3 towers that day.

            the only people who would argue against a transparent, unfettered independent investigation into the events of 911 are those with a vested interest in supressing the truth.

            frankly, to hope that albury would voluntarily disclose such things is as likely as there will ever be credible proof beyond all reasonable doubt that bin laden was killed in may of 2011.

            ie; NONE

            there is irefutable evidence that the events of 911 did not happen as we are being told,

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jazdG3-ZETM

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iND-b8Q3jc

            but despite that, and despite not being asked, albury will continue to offer his unqualified, anonymous opinion, as if he is the final arbiter of truth, in relation to ANYTHING to do with 911. a self proclaimed expert..

            its so pathetic, if it wasnt for the fact that on the backs of the lies of that fateful day, hundreds of thousands of innocent men women and children have been killed, civil and constitutional rights have been shredded, and the world has been subjected to a never ending war of terror, it would be funny.

            This video puts to rest ALL of alburys arguments and shows exactly why 911 needs a proper investigation.
            Professor Daniele Ganser (Switzerland) – 10 Years After 9/11 The Official Account Does Not Add Up

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fUT7XgLiTY

  2. I saw a Canadian news special – I believe it was ”Fifth Estate” about the “9/11 Truthers”.  Part of their conspiracy theory embraces the belief that everyone who was a passenger on one of the planes and called a loved one were actually actors playing the role of passengers and then the government executed the actors.  You have to really want to believe in the conspiracy theory to buy their whole story.

    • Its dishonest to clump a whole group of people from a view of some of the people out there.

      There’s people that believe in aliens, and space beams and all kinds of weird stuff.  Why do the 1,500 Architects and Engineers who stick to FACTS only, get clumped in with those people? Why do you automatically jump the gun and assume they endorse actors in planes and such?  Condemnation without investigation is the highest form of ignorance.  Why would you go on attack mode before even researching what you speak of?

      http://www.AE911Truth.org – You can verify their license numbers, degrees, and names there. 

      Newtonian Physics, Govt Reports, and Govt Videos is what they use for evidence.  Stop generalizing a whole movement because people believe different things.  In the end, a reinvestigation is required, simply on the fact that the 9/11 commissioners said THEMSELVES that their 9/11 commission was “SET UP TO FAIL.”
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tzrv-e37Es8

      Look at the evidence, examine it, use your intellect.  You can do it.
      http://www.RememberBuilding7.org
      http://www.FireFightersfor911Truth.org
      http://www.MilitaryOfficersfor911Truth.org

      • Oh people have looked at the “evidence” presented by truthers, and sane people have generally considered it to be laughable.

        Are you one of those ‘fire cant melt steel’ geniuses?

        • Are you one of those “it has been debunked by Popular Mechanics” idiots ?

          • no not at all.  i dont even know what popular mechanics has to do with anything.  im simply not confounded by the fact that if an airliner crashes into a building, the building collapses.

          • Or an airliner doesn’t crash into a building, and it collapses.
            Are you aware of World Trader 7 ?
            47 stories in 6.5 seconds.

          • The collapse of WTC 7′s facade actually took closer to 9 seconds, Graham, and the top ~242′ of the ~610′ total height was very accurately timed in ~5.4 seconds, since that portion of it is visible in videos. Did the bottom ~368′ fall in ~1.1 seconds, or are your “researchers” just inventing facts? Please feel free to look at any video of the WTC 7 collapse and explain how they timed it to the nearest 1/10 second, and got 6.5 seconds for the whole thing. Jeezus, it’s stupid enough to claim that a collapse time or partial collapse time is indicative of the cause of a building’s collapse, but it’s practically their entire argument and they can’t even get the time right.  

          • Albury, there’s video of WTC 7, its an obvious demo. you must be either a paid rat or a moron …. the video of the side 3/4 angle shows the columns exploding at the same time. fire damage ? hahaha
            hahahahah Albury. poor bastard.
            Still believing Dick Cheney’s absurd Fairy Tale.
            Next thing Albury will start defending the Official Bin Laden Kill mission, what version ?
            another farce.

          • I’ve never heard Dick Cheney’s opinion on the collapse of WTC 7, but there are no videos that show the interior column failures that caused it. This scientist addresses the absurd notion that “it’s an obvious demo”:

            http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/911NutPhysics0.HTM

            What would it have looked like if the Probable Collapse Sequence in NCSTAR 1A had occurred?

             

  3.  Actually history is loaded with conspiracies.
     
    Julius Caesar, Brutus  and the senators . Guy Falkes  and blowing up Parliament.  Elizabeth I had Mary, Queen of Scots, executed for plotting a coup. The Pope conspired to keep Galileo’s knowledge from the world. King William II, was ‘mysteriously’  killed in a forest in a crowd of people. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand  began WWI. D’arcy McGee’s murder was a long time in the making. Timothy McVeigh was in a conspiracy to bomb a building. The Third Reich wasn’t created by just one person . JFK, RFK and MLK were not coincidences.  911 itself was a conspiracy.
     
    Much of what goes on in the world comes from conspiracies.
     
    So don’t pretend it’s some wacko mental problem.
     
    See…it just depends on whether you’re in on it or not.

  4. Richard Gage is a champion for truth from the unanswered questions that surround 9/11-  Considering the recent polls published on Jonathan’s “free fall drop in circulation numbers” The National Post -  An Ipsos Reid poll published in the National Post tells us that only 32% of Canadian journalists and only 25% of our national politicians are regarded as “highly trustworthy”. Thank goodness trust can be found once again from the investigative research by Gage and his team of over 1400 Architects and Engineers who filled in the gaps with solid evidence of controlled demolition of the World Trade Towers on 9/11

    Sour Grapes describes Kay’s book ” Among The Truthers” from what I’ve read so far.

    Keep up the momentum for truth – Richard!

    • Coming to you live, from Mommy’s Basement . . . 

      • When i see a reply like that “mommy’s basement” it shows how little you know about 9-11.
        Say something intelligent. 

    • “The Media Knows Nothing” of 9/11
      Quoted by CBC’s Heather Mallick
      Thursday
      October 4, 2007 University of Alberta/ Mel Hurtig Lecture series.
      Heather Mallick quotes Pulitzer Prize Seymour Hersh during a Mel Hurtig
      lecture invitation at the University of Alberta. Transcribed by Richard
      D. Brinkman . Oct 25, 2010.

      Audience Question:
      Why are we accepting what the American government is telling us what
      happened on September 11, 2001 at face value, when it’s all over the
      Internet that it could not possibly have happened without help from the
      inside, especially the building called number seven that fell for no
      reason at all! (audience applause).

      Heather Mallick:
      “So did everyone hear that, the question is why have we accepted the
      official explanation for September 11, the American explanation?, Well
      it’s very interesting because even Seymour Hersh who I trust more than
      any journalist in the world says ” I don’t know what happened on 9/11?”.
      I’m not sure but I think the main reason why we accept that version is
      because there is no one out there in mainstream journalism giving us any
      information on that, we are just told what governments and corporations
      want us to hear, we rely on corporate sources of information. In Canada
      our newspapers are owned by for instance Globe and Mail is owned by
      CTV, Global ( PostMedia) owns newspapers published across the
      country…I still can’t believe that that is true…it’s talking to me,
      but your never going to get alternative views of current affairs and of
      history as long as the means of transmitting information is so
      corporately owned.”

  5.  This article and Kay’s book sounds like nothing but an effort to write defamatory remarks towards people trying to question what we’ve been told by the media and our government. 9/11 Truthers aren’t alone in their witchhunt. They are in great company with other doctor’s and scientists who bring to light new evidence which goes against the mainstream beliefs. The more the media tries to deny us a voice about 9/11 truth, the stronger we are. 

    • The media hasnt denied you anything.  But if you have some insight into why 9/11 was a conspiracy, let’s hear it.

      • 9/11 Truth and Canada’s Irresponsible Main Stream Media- YouTube Features John F. Kennedy, Jonathan Kay, Heather Mallick of CBC.ca, Interviews with people on the streets about 9/11 and the media and Canada’s first journalist to challenge the official “George Bush’s” 9/11 Commission story author Barry Zwicker on the media…

        Quoted in video by Heather Mallick ” The Media Knows nothing about 9/11 ”

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Siosb68mxk

        • Heather Mallick?  The most insane and hysterical of all columnists in Canada?  yeah, ok buddy.  *** slowly backs away ***

          • one example of evidence-
            Active Thermite Material Discovered in the Dust
            from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

            The Open Chemical Physics Journal, 2009, 2, 7-31 7

            Niels H. Harrit* Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, and Bradley R. Larsen.

            Abstract: We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the
            destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in
            this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan
            resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.
            The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy
            dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately
            100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation
            of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum
            are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring
            at approximately 430 °C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich
            spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these
            chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.

            http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.htm

          • The Bentham paper offered conclusive proof of the presence of rust, aluminum, sulfur, silicon, etc. in some WTC dust samples, and concluded that these remarkable findings ”reminded” someone of something for which no exemplars were provided for comparison. 
            Here are some better ones: 
             http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-P-bEHKVIE
             

          • Read the paper before you troll

          • oh, a science-illiterate tells me to read a paper. pure comedy :)

          • Does the idea of actually reading something offend you, B23? Your comments on the Bentham baloney clearly indicate that you’ve never read it. 

  6. No “truther” here.

    That being said, you know, a stronger excerpt on Kay’s part might have included some sort of engagement with any argument — some sort of a semblance to a scholarly approach as opposed to, well, this. Couldn’t believe it ended so abruptly. “That’s it”?

    All I’ve gained from reading it is [1] Kay does not personally believe in conspiracy theories for reasons undisclosed, and [2] he does not possess the ability to write objectively, preferring to delve into what comes across as picking on people. 

  7. I’ve always been very critical of Jonathan’s Kay’s 911 Hit Pieces in the past as some of his National Post columns have been totally egregious.
    He’s constantly insulted anyone questioning the Bush version of 911 and who isn’t a government lapdog hypnotized by presstitute spin doctors , i almost felt bad and embarrassed watching him on TVO the other day as he tried to debate Richard Gage and Barry Zwicker using only straw man arguments and wild baseless comparisons of legitimate 911 questions to UFO’s and Holocaust denial.

    I trust the 1500 Architect and Engineers that have looked at the scientific data and compared it to the flimsy evidence from the partisan hacks who constructed Bush’s 911 Narrative ,
    sorry but Mr Kays past experience is writing MOSSAD tales of fiction so please lets not even debate whose more credible when it comes to the science of 911.
    http://www.amazon.ca/Volunteer-Canadians-Secret-Life-Mossad/dp/0771017405

    But once in awhile Mr Kay will come across as very reasonable and i feel this is fair piece on Gage, Kay’s snide little comments almost feel like a weak attempt at cover and to appease his base who are true neo con believers, while fairly presenting Gage(by your standards) and his story.

    Thanks Jonathan !

    i left this article feeling like Mr Gage is on the right track and a true patriot.

    Anyone that looks at the evidence that was purposefully left out of the “investigation” and subsequent cover up knows the Bush Fairy Tale is a fraud easily exposed by 2 1/2 seconds of FreeFall that even NIST now has been forced to admit.

    The ironic thing is that the 911 Truth Movement grows stronger when the mainstream pressitutes demonize them with ad hominem childish put downs and straw man arguments.

    http://www.ae911truth.org

  8. I’ve always been very critical of Jonathan’s Kay’s 911 Hit Pieces in the
    past as some of his National Post columns have been totally egregious but i also let him know when he’s done o.k.
    This article almost finds a decent balance.
     Unfortunately Kay has consistently insulted anyone questioning the Bush version of 911 and
    who isn’t a government lapdog hypnotized by paid pundits and presstitute spin doctors.
     I almost felt bad and embarrassed watching him on TVO the other day as he
    tried to debate Richard Gage and Barry Zwicker using only straw man
    arguments and wild baseless comparisons of legitimate 911 questions to
    UFO’s and Holocaust denial.
    This is a very weak and obvious tactic and unless your a clueless tw*t , it’s easily identifiable.

    I trust the 1500 Architect and Engineers that have looked at the
    scientific data and compared it to the flimsy evidence from the partisan
    hacks who constructed Bush’s 911 Narrative for myth expert Philip Zelikow. Yes, a myth expert directed the 911 Commission, research it, his name is Zelikow.

    Mr Kay is rather delusional if he thinks his past experience of writing about his fairy tale, wanna-be life as a treasonous Canadian working for the MOSSAD is more credible than 1500 Architects and Engineers who have looked at the data and now risked their careers and reputations speaking out about how the data doesnt match the Official Fable.

    Here’s some of Mr Kay’s past expertise

    http://www.amazon.ca/Volunteer-Canadians-Secret-Life-Mossad/dp/0771017405

    But once in awhile Mr Kay will come across as very reasonable and i feel
    this is a somewhat fair piece on Richard Gage, for a Mockingbird 2.0 agent anyway.

    i left this article feeling like Mr Gage is on the right track and a true patriot even with a couple of Kay’s

    demeaning little brushstrokes.

    The irony is that the 911 Truth Movement grows stronger everytime the
    mainstream pressitutes demonize them with ad hominem childish put downs
    and straw man arguments.

    Thanks Jonathan and thanks to Macleans for running it as i know for a fact there’s
    staff members working there that also question the Bush Cheney Zelikow 911 narrative like millions of
    Canadians.

    http://www.ae911truth.org

  9. If anyone has any intellectual power and they read the NIST Report, and discover the Free Fall collapse that they admit to happening on page 45 for 8 stories in WTC7, they will too agree a reinvestigation is required.  Why?

    For Free Fall to occur, those 8 stories must have their core columns and support beams removed entirely for the full length and width of the building.  You can only achieve free fall if this is the case.

    You can only accomplish removing these core columns and support beams for 8 floors with demolition.

    RememberBuilding7.org

    1,500 Architects and Engineers and counting agree. AE911Truth.org

    80,000 NYC residents and counting agree. NYCCAN.org

    Military Officers and Fire Fighters agree. MilitaryOfficersfor911truth.org FireFightersfor911Truth .org

    Lawyers, pilots, scientists, scholars, and victim family members agree.
    Lawyersfor911Truth.org – pilotsfor911truth.org – scientistsfor911truth.org – scholarsfor911truth.org

    Condemnation without investigation is the highest form of ignorance – Einstein

    Look at the facts.  Youtube.com/ae911truth

  10. Please do your own research on this.  there’s no reason you can’t take a SECOND LOOK before giving up your 4th amendment rights to the Patriot Act and TSA.

    >>> http://www.RememberBuilding7.org <<<

    This website was set up by 9/11 Victim's Family members, 1,500 Architects and Engineers, first responders, military officers, medical professionals, scholars, fire fighters, 80,000 NYC residents and many more.

    •  Research this, P & R:

      re: nyccan.org/ and buildingwhat.org/ To Whom it May Concern: If you need to mount a campaign to inform NYC council members and others of the fact that WTC 7 collapsed almost 7 hours after the North Tower came down on 9/11, then what was the reason for its alleged controlled demolition in the first place? Did the US government need an additional building collapse that day that took no lives, well after both towers, WTCs 3, 4, 5, and 6, four airliners, and part of the Pentagon had already been destroyed or badly damaged, and nearly 3000 innocent people had been violently murdered, to get its almost unanimous congressional resolution to go to war in Afghanistan where al Qaeda was headquartered and where President Clinton sent Tomahawk missiles in response to their previous coordinated and deadly suicide operations against two US embassies in Africa in 1998? How on earth do you “bring justice” to Mr. McIlvaine’s remarkable and beloved son Robert G. by libeling more than 210 NIST experts, Larry Silverstein, and countless others with absurd claims based on junk science by profiteering charlatans like Richard Gage and his “engineers,” and by harassing NYC council members for a new investigation when you obviously haven’t even bothered to read NCSTAR 1A, which is the product of a thorough and very competent investigation by people with real science and engineering credentials? Why do you urge people to “ask OFFICIALS to investigate Building 7,” when at least 125 of the scientists and engineers involved in the NIST investigation of WTC 7 were CIVILIANS from academia and private industry?   Robert wasn’t even in WTC 7 when Muhammad Atta flew the hijacked Boeing 767 into WTC 1 ten stories below him on the morning of 9/11/01, and when he was suddenly and unexpectedly doomed to death along with everyone else in his group and everyone above the 92nd floor, nearly nine hours before the late afternoon collapse of WTC 7. The FDNY feared that it would eventually collapse, which is why they abandoned any effort to fight the fires and pulled everyone back a safe distance, preventing more “terrible loss of life,” as WTC 7′s owner later related in a PBS interview. Robert’s death was a tragic loss, and my profound sympathy for Mr. McIlvaine is hard to put into words, but I’d like you and anyone else who’s thinking of signing your petition to answer the following questions first, since you’ve fallen prey to the manipulative liars of the 9/11 “truth movement” and think Larry Silverstein destroyed his own property or knew about it: -Why would Larry Silverstein have publicly admitted even to knowing that there were planted explosives in WTC 7 in the first place?-What was Silverstein Properties’ and the FDNY’s motive for blowing up a perfectly good, 14 year-old building, losing hundreds of millions of dollars in cash flow from it for nine years and counting, spending ~$700 million, or most of the $861 million insurance settlement, on the replacement of it, and paying ~$500 million back to lenders?
      (note: it was built in 1986-1987, at least 15 years after asbestos was written out of all building codes, and it had no asbestos in its SFRM or elsewhere. There was some on the first 38 floors of the North Tower, most of which had been abated during various tenant fit-outs well before he won the lease by default when Vornado’s deal with the PA fell though, but none in the South Tower, which was built after the code change went into effect)-Why would any insurance company have paid him a dime instead of the $4.68 BILLION total he received if he publicly admitted to foreknowledge of or complicity in the alleged secret demolition of his property, but especially those based in Copenhagen, Zurich (2 of them), and London? They all contested his claim of two occurrences based on two separate plane crashes, and he won in court in a few instances based on individual contract wording, but there was never any question relating to the causes of any WTC collapse. -How did he or the FDNY know that flaming debris from a much taller collapsing hi-rise across the street would hit WTC 7, start multi-story fires in it, and break the water main to it, disabling the sprinklers and providing a cover story for the alleged controlled demolition?-If the explosives were pre-planted, which would have taken weeks or even months in a vacant building and have been completely impossible to do secretly in an occupied one, and Barry Jennings heard some of them go off around 10 AM, why was there any discussion at all in mid-afternoon about whether or not to demolish WTC 7 with the other apparently fireproof explosives allegedly planted a few stories higher?-Do controlled demolitions take seven or eight hours to collapse a building?-Do they leave no severed columns with copper residue on the ends, or any other evidence in the debris?-Do they leave ~12 stories on one corner standing?-Is the FDNY in the controlled demolition business? What other buildings, on fire or not, have they demolished before or since 9/11?-Please link me to a C/D contractor’s web site, and show me the use of “pull” or “pull it” to refer to building demolition using explosives, not one in which cables are used to pull an already damaged building over, as was done with WTC 6.-How does a “terrible loss of life” in the WTC towers affect a later decision to demolish a nearby building with no one in it?-A number of FDNY personnel were inside WTC 7 prior to the pullback order, presumably at risk from the alleged explosives, and most of the 343 FDNY fatalities resulted from the tower collapses, so why are there only a few FDNY in the 9/11 “truth movement”? You can count the number in this “truth” organization right here: firefightersfor911truth.org/?page_id=469  Are they simply not as astute as you are, or don’t they care what killed so many of their colleagues?-There was a pre-existing ConEd substation at the Vesey Street WTC 7 site in 1986, and the building was designed to straddle it, requiring some of the extremely long ~45′ girder and ~52′ beam spans inside that contributed to the 9/11 collapse. It was powered up and in full use on 9/11/01, and the demolition of a 200,000 ton, 47-story building directly on top of it very likely destroyed it completely. Do you know whether ConEd’s insurers just absorbed the loss of tens of millions of dollars in infrastructure damage and restoration and then subrogated Industrial Risk Insurers, since Larry Silverstein’s firm was still the responsible party, especially if he deliberately caused the damage?You are not honoring the memory of Mr. McIlvaine’s highly successful and accomplished young son or any of the other victims of the 9/11 al Qaeda attacks on the WTC towers by demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of the events that occurred that day, and by falsely implicating people who were totally uninvolved in the planning or execution of the Planes Operation, as 9/11 was known to the al Qaeda terrorists behind it. Sincere best wishes,Albury-What was Silverstein Properties’ and the FDNY’s motive for blowing up a perfectly good, 14 year-old building, losing hundreds of millions of dollars in cash flow from it for nine years and counting, spending ~$700 million, or most of the $861 million insurance settlement, on the replacement of it, and paying ~$500 million back to lenders?
      (note: it was built in 1986-1987, at least 15 years after asbestos was written out of all building codes, and it had no asbestos in its SFRM or elsewhere. There was some on the first 38 floors of the North Tower, most of which had been abated during various tenant fit-outs well before he won the lease by default when Vornado’s deal with the PA fell though, but none in the South Tower, which was built after the code change went into effect)-Why would any insurance company have paid him a dime instead of the $4.68 BILLION total he received if he publicly admitted to foreknowledge of or complicity in the alleged secret demolition of his property, but especially those based in Copenhagen, Zurich (2 of them), and London? They all contested his claim of two occurrences based on two separate plane crashes, and he won in court in a few instances based on individual contract wording, but there was never any question relating to the causes of any WTC collapse. -How did he or the FDNY know that flaming debris from a much taller collapsing hi-rise across the street would hit WTC 7, start multi-story fires in it, and break the water main to it, disabling the sprinklers and providing a cover story for the alleged controlled demolition?-If the explosives were pre-planted, which would have taken weeks or even months in a vacant building and have been completely impossible to do secretly in an occupied one, and Barry Jennings heard some of them go off around 10 AM, why was there any discussion at all in mid-afternoon about whether or not to demolish WTC 7 with the other apparently fireproof explosives allegedly planted a few stories higher?-Do controlled demolitions take seven or eight hours to collapse a building?-Do they leave no severed columns with copper residue on the ends, or any other evidence in the debris?-Do they leave ~12 stories on one corner standing?-Is the FDNY in the controlled demolition business? What other buildings, on fire or not, have they demolished before or since 9/11?-Please link me to a C/D contractor’s web site, and show me the use of “pull” or “pull it” to refer to building demolition using explosives, not one in which cables are used to pull an already damaged building over, as was done with WTC 6.-How does a “terrible loss of life” in the WTC towers affect a later decision to demolish a nearby building with no one in it?-A number of FDNY personnel were inside WTC 7 prior to the pullback order, presumably at risk from the alleged explosives, and most of the 343 FDNY fatalities resulted from the tower collapses, so why are there only a few FDNY in the 9/11 “truth movement”? You can count the number in this “truth” organization right here: firefightersfor911truth.org/?page_id=469  Are they simply not as astute as you are, or don’t they care what killed so many of their colleagues?-There was a pre-existing ConEd substation at the Vesey Street WTC 7 site in 1986, and the building was designed to straddle it, requiring some of the extremely long ~45′ girder and ~52′ beam spans inside that contributed to the 9/11 collapse. It was powered up and in full use on 9/11/01, and the demolition of a 200,000 ton, 47-story building directly on top of it very likely destroyed it completely. Do you know whether ConEd’s insurers just absorbed the loss of tens of millions of dollars in infrastructure damage and restoration and then subrogated Industrial Risk Insurers, since Larry Silverstein’s firm was still the responsible party, especially if he deliberately caused the damage?You are not honoring the memory of Mr. McIlvaine’s highly successful and accomplished young son or any of the other victims of the 9/11 al Qaeda attacks on the WTC towers by demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of the events that occurred that day, and by falsely implicating people who were totally uninvolved in the planning or execution of the Planes Operation, as 9/11 was known to the al Qaeda terrorists behind it. Sincere best wishes,Albury

  11. I think it’s time to investigate some of the bizarre and absurd claims made by Richard Gage, not the three WTC hi-rise collapses on 9/11, since they’ve already been thoroughly investigated by much more qualified, competent, and honest people. The NIST scientists and engineers were only able to time the top 18 stories, or 242′, of the collapse of WTC 7′s facade, and determined that it took 5.4 seconds, yet Gage and others in the 9/11 “truth movement” claim that the entire 610′ collapse only took ~6.5 seconds. Did the other 368′ fall in just over 1 second? How is he even able to give us a time to the nearest 1/10 of a second for the entire collapse when NIST couldn’t because buildings in the foreground blocked the view of video cameras? How can he claim that the towers nearly free fell when the loose, airborne debris from their upper stories was obviously falling much faster than the collapse zones, and began hitting the ground while at least 40 stories in each one were still intact? The North Tower was only down to the height of WTC 7 when debris from the upper stories first hit the ground. Was g miraculously increased on 9/11? They fell in ~15 and ~22 seconds respectively, nowhere near the ~9.25 seconds that free fall would have taken: http://www.youtube.com/user/RKOwens4#p/u/40/qLShZOvxVe4 yet he begins every presentation with his near free-fall claim. He’s also claimed that the dust clouds from the collapses were “pyroclastic,” but there are no reports of anyone’s skin being instantly peeled off, and he’s claimed that the fires in WTC 7 were minor, totally contradicting these NYC eyewitnesses: http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofwtc7fireshttp://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/accountsofwtc7damagehttp://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofthewithdrawalfromwtc How could his claim that 400,000 yards of concrete were turned to fine powder be true, when there was less than 100,000 yards of concrete above grade in both towers combined? Does he know how to turn 400,000 yards of concrete to fine powder with explosives without leveling NYC? Has he ever seen a controlled demolition that left molten metal in the debris for months? Has he ever seen one that didn’t leave even one explosively-cut column in the debris? Since he claims that explosives were planted in the core columns to start the collapses, and that it was done from elevator shafts, has he even looked a floor plan of the cores above the 78th floor sky lobby? There were only 6 regular elevators above there, plus a freight and 2 express elevators, and they were only near 6 of the 47 core columns. Several of those were in the paths of the planes, and the perimeter columns collapsed first, so he’s not even making sense, especially considering the fact that 30 or more stories of core framing stood 15-25 seconds after each tower’s main collapse was over.   We should investigate the nonsense coming from Richard Gage, as well as his “engineers.” http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3834688&postcount=12
     

      • who’s the troll here?
        oh wait, never mind…..
        But really, some of you people have been watching way to much Jesse Ventura.   

        • I must be the troll here, Cyndi. Instead of replying to my comment with something substantive, Buster23 wants to know who’s paying me to argue against the nonsense coming from Richard Gage and others in the 9/11 “truth movement.” :-)  

      • Actually, “Ultraman” ducked every one of them, B23, but please feel free to answer them yourself. Who’s paying you to comment here, if I may ask? 

        • Whole governments rarely orchestrate incredibly complex acts of physics, logistics, and mass murder all the while pinning guilt on others (who boast that they acted alone).  How do Truthers explain Al Qaeda’s eager willingness to take full credit for these attacks?  How do they explain the government’s ability to rig the buildings with explosives without a single person noticing?  Do they really believe that thousands of people were able to keep the biggest secret in American history? 

          •  Here’s my short list of some of the conspirators in the 9/11 “truth movement’s” plot, Noah:
            me, Chimp and Deadeye, the FAA, NTSB, Larry Silverstein, two major US airlines, the Mossad, Daniel Nigro and the FDNY, Donald Duck, NIST, Les Robertson, Gene Corley, Matthys Levy, Irwin Cantor, Mark Roberts, Ron Wieck, the DoD, NORAD, Ted Olson, the NYPD, Val McClatchey, FEMA, Brent Blanchard, Columbia’s LDEO, Mark Loizeaux and CDI, Mickey Mouse, the PNAC, ASCE, PA State Police, Richard Myers, the CIA, Lloyd England, the FBI, Bugs Bunny, Popular Mechanics, Marvin Bush, Wile E. Coyote, Jerome Hauer, tens of thousands of eyewitnesses at the crash sites, Barack Obama, Donald Rumsfeld, the SEC, plus the 2 guys in these videos:
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7-XfE7KcU
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5BJzEshMes
             2 people in DC can’t even keep oral sex in the WH secret, but thousands can keep this one under wraps for ~10 years. :-)

          • troLoLoL

          • You’re just a wealth of knowledge, B23. What did I get wrong about Box Boy’s “bizarre and absurd claims” in my previous post on them here?

          • obvious troll

          •  …you forgot Halibuton, as obviously the whole thing was engineered for the benefit of their shareholders…

          •  thousands ? hahahaah Albury, same old tactics….
            clown.

          • There were more than 40,000 people working on the NYC cleanup, and no one reported seeing a column or other piece of structural steel with a melted or explosively-severed end, so there’s thousands for you. Were they all in on the conspiracy too?

    • Albury Smith has copy pasted RKOwens and Popular mechanics debunked garbage for years. I think he’s a paid rat.
      No one works as hard as him and Jonathan Kay to defend the Official Fraud.

  12. Jonathan Kay lost me when he claimed in his interview with Steve Paiken the other day that the word “neo-con” is anti-semitic. What can you say in the face of that kind of paranoia? 

  13. Here’s something else. In the introduction to this article, Richard Gage is refered to as a “conspiracist.” Huh? He’s not even a “conspiracy theorist.” His interest is in how building 7 fell. He has never (to my knowledge) proposed a theory beyond that the thermate dust and near-freefall speed of the collapse, as well as the evidence of foreknowledge of the building’s collapse, can best be explained by everyday practices of controlled demolition, rather than by the fires that burned in the building that day.

    On the one hand, Jonathan Kay may have something in his references (not in this article, but in his debate with Gage on Paiken’s program the other day) that it’s better not to go “down the rabbit hole” of questioning the official line on 9/11. It really could suck the life out of you, if you let it. And he’s right, too (in my experience) that a lot of the actors in the Truth movement match a version of middle-aged men having a midlife crisis or showing a messianic streak (and willing to throw to the winds much that previously fulfilled them).

    On the other hand, and this question would have to be directed right at Kay, is it really worth living a life “top-side” (not down the rabbit hole) if that life requires you live a lie? A lot of midlife crises have been spawned by a negative answer to that question.

  14. Gawd another secular religion to go with global warmism. 

  15. Personal putdowns of Mr. Gage.
    No engagement of arguments.
    Generalizing by calling people truthers.

    If Kay knew anything about Richard Gage and his organization, he would know that they don’t subscribe to any conspiracy theories. They are focusing on science, that is what will see them through all these hysterical and malicious attacks.

    Read and educate yourself, come to your own conclusions.
    Mr. Kay’s article is a persuasion piece and he is not asking you to think for yourself..

    • If they’re so focused on science, Graham, why do they get caught lying so often?  

    • Graham- In Kay’s book he refers to all 9/11 truthers from David Ray Griffin, Richard Gage on down to anyone daring to question the government on 9/11 as ‘ Cranks” .

      Also almost every news article that has run in the National Post over the past 3 years ( Kay – as managing editor)  has compare people who question 9/11 as anti Semitics (JEW HATERS) . That is an out-right hate filled attack against all citizens who question the government with any controversial matter.

      Racism exists everywhere including some who question 9/11 and in the Corporate Editorial Policies of the National Post – I personally contacted Dr Bob Friedman President Winnipeg’s Jewish Federation ( same city CanWest head office was located)  and asked Bob, how can we work together to counter racism in the 9/11 truth movement and the media… I had a mission as one 9/11 truther to do my part confronting racism.

      He was not interested in helping- he quoted- “there is no Jew in the world who would help the 9/11 truth movement”…

      He’s wrong cause there are many Jews interested in 9/11 truth just as there are many 9/11 truthers who hate racism .

       It looks like the National Posts demonizing 9/11 truthers over the years using the anti Semitic card has done it’s damage but you can’t hide the truth about 9/11 forever- Too many people including my neighbors and friends who are Jews, Muslims, Christians and atheists love the truth … No one likes to be lied to and be deceived by those who sow seed of deception- including people who work for Corporate media.

      PS Kay- if you read this- please stop calling people who question the government anti Semitic- it’s full of spite, hate and hurtful to me, my friends and others who question the government on 9/11. It’s insult to Canada’s Jewish community as a whole that you would carelessly compare 9/11 truthers as holocaust deniers .

      •  I am a jew that questions 9-11.

        • Why haven’t you questioned Richard Gage, when there’s infinitely more reason to do so? 

    • The link to your malarkey doesn’t work either.

    • Would you please point out some of Jonathan Kay’s ad hominem attacks on Mr. Gage?

  16. “If the future of reasonable discourse lies in the hands of the likes of Jonathan Kay then we’re doomed, his book is absolutely an advertisement for anti-reasoning, anti evidence , name calling and dehumanization ” ~ Barry Zwicker
    Well said,
    Jonathan Kay is a joke who should stick to writing Mossad Fairy Tales instead of defending them.

  17. albury smith shill ( aka ass ) is an unqualified, anonymous troll, a demonstrable liar, who spends his life trolling any website that refers to 911 truth, posting his unsolicited absurd misinformation, disinformation and obfuscations on every page possible, tirelessly and repetitively.. all the while pretending to be some sort of final arbiter, on all things 911 who, while remaining anonymous, continually slanders qualified experts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fUT7XgLiTY

    the official version of events is nothing more than mere allegations. there has never been any credible evidence offered to support any of it. as a matter of fact, their own *evidence* actually proves 100% the official version of events can not be true, as a little investigation into the murray street engine shows… http://ckpi.typepad.com/christopher_king/2009/09/murray-street-engine.html

    It doesnt matter how or what was used to bring building 7 down, or if it took ten seconds or thirty. The fact that building 7 fell at freefall acceleration for ~2.5 seconds, as acknowledged begrudgingly by NIST, IS evidence that explosives were used as it is IMPOSSIBLE for all the structural support necessary for freefall acceleration to be achieved to be removed instantaneously and simultaneously without some form of controlled demolition. http://rememberbuilding7.org/

    as he well knows, and as he is unable to prove otherwise beyond any reasonable doubt, not just because he is an anonymous unqualified troll, but because the laws of physics applied just as much on 9-11 as they do today. any legitimate psychiatrist would therefore regard alburys position as insane. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/09/psychologists-mental-health-questioning-911-sane.html

    further evidence of his chutzpah can be witnessed via a simple internet search for “albury smith 9 11″ – his pitiful efforts are quite amusing as he stuggles against an overwhelming growing majority of people who after looking into a few facts, find it not unreasonable for family members of the victims to be calling for a proper independent transparent unfettered investigation with subpoena power, as called for, by an overwhelming, continually growing, majority of the worlds population, a fact verifiable by past and recent polls. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/09/911-and-the-war-on-terror-polls-show-what-people-really-believe-10-years-later.html

    albury currently going flat out at these sites lol..
    http://www.darkmoon.me/2012/who-runs-the-madhouse-by-dr-paul-craig-roberts/comment-page-1/#comments
    http://www.wmnf.org/news_stories/911-debate-do-we-know-the-truth
    http://911truthedmonton.blogspot.com/2012/06/looking-back-2011-fringe-festival.html
    http://theupliftingcrane.wordpress.com/2012/06/04/professionals-for-911-truth-2/
    http://www.straight.com/article-697721/vancouver/911-truthers-event-follows-victory
    http://commonground.ca/2012/06/911-bamboozle/
    http://thedailynewsonline.com/opinion/article_4d828b2a-b186-11e1-8114-001a4bcf887a.html
    http://govtslaves.info/former-head-of-star-wars-program-says-cheney-main-911-suspect/

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *