Fetzer: On C-Span, Richard Gage leaves 9/11 truth in a time warp (Fake truth?)

Editor’s note: Lenin observed, “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it”.


…by Jim Fetzer

VT References which coincide and include the Prager/Pommer study as well are published here:

VT Nuclear Education

[ Editor’s note: Lenin observed, “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it”. Richard Gage, the founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, was featured on C-SPAN on 1 August 2014. He was unable to explain who was responsible and why, and his answer to how it was done was already known to be hopelessly inadequate. Perhaps that’s why he was chosen to appear.]

“9/11 was conceived as an elaborate psychological operation to instill fear into the American people in order to manipulate them into supporting the political agenda of the Bush/Cheney administration” – Jim Fetzer

Everyone who’s committed to 9/11 Truth should welcome more coverage from C-SPAN. Perhaps the greatest coverage to reach the public in the past was also from C-SPAN, when it covered the panel discussion of the American Scholars Conference, Los Angeles, 24-25 June 2006. But this one might be an exception.

We heard then about nano-thermite from Steve Jones, Co-Chair of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. And we heard it again from the founder of A&E911. But a major division has arisen between those who claim that nano-thermite can have blown the buildings apart and those who maintain that it isn’t even theoretically possible. Recent intel dumps confirm the use of nukes and explain those small iron spheres as a consequence of the use of special (iron jacketed) high-tech nukes.

So what’s with Richard Gage and A&E911 that they are still promoting a theory that T. Mark Hightower and I proved was indefensible in three articles published on 1 May 2011, on 17 July 2011 and on 27 August 2011?  Why did Gage squander this precious opportunity to advance 9/11 Truth on C-SPAN by endorsing a provably false theory?

The “big three” questions

Not only that, but there are three major questions in the public mind about 9/11, which are these:

(a) what happened on 9/11? 

(b) how was it done?

(c) who was responsible and why?

We know the before and after of the World Trade Center in relation to 9/11, so the answer to (a) is trivial. But Richard Gage had no answer to (c), even though he was asked it several times, and his answer to (b) was false and misleading. Is this the best that Richard Gage and A&E911 can do? It was embarrassing when he was asked the all too obvious question and could not answer it. [Editor’s note: In retrospect, that may have been the point and why he rather than, say, the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, was featured on C-SPAN.]

A&E911 is not alone in attempting to place the how ahead of the who and the why, where Judy Wood and her DEW supporters adopt the very same stance. But the American public has limited patience with those who can’t produce answers to such obvious questions, especially more than a decade after the event. And that is why “Operation Terror”, Art Olivier’s reconstruction of the events of 9/11, is a more powerful instrument for opening the mind to what may have happened than the appeal to an obscure causal mechanism–especially when it is misconceived.

All three questions have justifiable answers, but Richard Gage did not deliver them. It was much worse than that, because the host had prepared to defeat any appeal he would make to “thermite”, using NIST as his authority and thereby begging the question, by assuming the position of NIST that is the position in doubt:

Most Americans are too gullible to realize that this is citing the very source that Gage is disputing. But it could have been worse. He could have pointed out that Neils Harrit, a proponent of the nano-thermite hypothesis, has estimated that it would have required “hundreds of tons” to do the job (where Harrit has also offered the more precise calculation of from 29,000 metric tons to 143,000 metric tons for each tower) or that the lab Christopher Bollyn has cited Los Alamos as his source for “explosive nano-thermite” told Gordon Duff “they couldn’t produce anything smaller than 10 microns and it couldn’t blow a hole in a piece of paper”.

Why nano-thermite can’t cut it

If this had been an episode of “The Twilight Zone”, it might have made more sense where 9/11 Truth is caught in a time warp. Richard Gage must know by now that nano-thermite cannot live up to its capabilities as advanced by Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan, and others, who regard themselves as the custodians and only true practitioners of the scientific method in 9/11 research. Nano-thermite (or even “thermite”, which is the term Gage used) has only 1/13 the explosive force of TNT and, whatever contribution it may have made to the collapse of Building 7, cannot possibly have been responsible for blowing apart the Twin Towers.

As Denis Spitzer et al., “Energetic nano-materials: Opportunities for enhanced performances”, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids (2010), observes, given the crucial role of the rapid expansion of gases to perform work by explosives, states, “Gas generating nano-thermites: Thermites are energetic materials, which do not release gaseous species when they decompose. However, explosives can be blended in thermites to give them blasting properties”, which implies that, unless supplemented with explosives, nano-thermites are non-explosive. So Mark and I may have been overly generous.

Having published three articles explaining that nano-thermite cannot have done it and to inform prominent researchers about this discovery, Mark wrote to Steven Jones, Richard Gage, and others. Dwain Deets, the former Chief of Research Engineering and Director for Aeronautical Projects at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, wrote to Mark and told him that he had listened to our interview on “The Real Deal” and said: “Excellent interview. A step toward trimming back claims that overshoot the evidence.”

Dwain also sent a diagram illustrating certain detonation velocities as well as the sonic (speed of sound) velocities in various materials. Thus, for a high explosive to significantly fragment a material, its detonation velocity must be equal to or greater than the speed of sound in that material. This law requires a detonation velocity of at least 3,200 m/s to fragment concrete and 6,100 m/s to fragment steel, which is far beyond the highest recorded detonation velocity of 895 m/s for nano-thermite.

“Explosive Evidence”

It came as no surprise when Richard Gage recommended “Explosive Evidence”, the A&E911 documentary about what happened to the World Trade Center, especially to WTC-7. Since it was published on 12 September 2012, while Mark and I published our studies in May-August 2011, A&E911 must have known that the theory they were presenting had already been shown to be indefensible on scientific grounds. While nano-thermite proponents claim to be “scientific”, they violate the canons of science by not revising their views when new evidence or new hypotheses become available.

Indeed, during The Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference, which was held in Urbana, IL, on 22 September 2013, we presented “Explosive Evidence” as the first hour of the conference,  where I advanced a critique of its limitations and shortcomings during the second hour as follows and explained why the currently available evidence now supports the conclusion that the Twin Towers were taken out using a sophisticated arrangement of micro or mini nukes, which appear to have been attached to the core columns of each:


Indeed, ample substantiation had already been presented during The Vancouver Hearings, which were held there 15-17 June 2012, including several presentations that supported the use of nukes on 9/11, the most significant of which was made by Jeff Prager (where Don Fox presented on his behalf). Jeff explained that, in 2002, he set out to prove that, on 9/11, 19 Muslims had hijacked four planes and attacked us. But by 2005, he realized this was false, sold his business, left the US and began to investigate 9/11 full-time. (See his 9/11 America Nuked.)

How it was done

In “Proof of Ternary Fission in New York City on 9/11″ he observes (1) that dust samples are the best evidence of what happened on 9/11; (2) that the USGS samples taken over a dozen locations show how various elements interacted prove that fission reaction(s) had taken place; (3) that Multiple Myeloma in the general population at a rate of 3-9 incidents per 100,000 people, but the rate was 18 per 100,000 among first responders; (4) that other cancers relatively unusual cancers have appeared among the responders, including non-Hodgkins lymphoma, leukemia, thyroid, pancreatic, brain, prostate, esophageal and blood and plasma cancers; and (5) that, as of March 2011, no less than 1,003 first responders died from various cancers. The elements found in the USGS dust samples provide a rather astonishing array of proof of nukes:

Barium and Strontium: Neither of these elements should ever appear in building debris in these quantities. The levels never fall below 400ppm for Barium and they never drop below 700ppm for Strontium and reach over 3000ppm for both in the dust sample taken at Broadway and John Streets.

Thorium and Uranium: These elements only exist in radioactive form. Thorium is a radioactive element formed from Uranium by decay. It’s very rare and should not be present in building rubble, ever. So once again we have verifiable evidence that a nuclear fission event has taken place.
Lithium: With the presence of lithium we have compelling evidence that this fission pathway of Uranium to Thorium and Helium, with subsequent decay of the Helium into Lithium has taken place.

Lanthanum: Lanthanum is the next element in the disintegration pathway of the element Barium.

Yttrium: The next decay element after Strontium, which further confirms the presence of Barium.
Chromium: The presence of Chromium is one more “tell tale” signature of a nuclear detonation.
Tritium: A very rare element and should not be found at concentrations 55 times normal the basement of WTC-6 no less than 11 days after 9/11, which is another “tell tale” sign of nukes.

New research on the use of nukes has provided further confirmation, including studies by Don Fox, Dr. Ed Ward and Jeff Prager, show these elements occur in patterns of correlation that make the hypothesis virtually undeniable (not that Steve Jones, Kevin Ryan and Richard Gage, among others, will not continue to deny it), where Gordon Duff has recently published that the actual number of New Yorkers who have incurred these unusual 9/11-related cancers has now increased to more than 70,000.

And this is not a new issue. In his analysis of “The Pros and Cons of the Toronto Hearings”, for example, which was published 20 September 2011, Joshua Blakeney observed that Judge Richard Lee was concerned about Kevin Ryan’s appeals to nano-thermite and asked whether it had ever been used to demolish a building. If there was even “an embarrassing moment” in the history of the 9/11 Truth movement, this must have been it. So why was Richard Gage repeating the blunder on C-SPAN? Wasn’t once bad enough?

It is ironic that the nano-thermite theory, which was based on dust samples, has been superseded by new research based on more comprehensive dust samples, but that is characteristic of scientific research: the discovery of new data or of new alternatives can lead to the rejection of hypotheses previously accepted, to the acceptance of hypotheses previously rejected and to leaving others in suspense, which is characteristic not only of science specifically but of rationality of belief in general.

 What about Planes/No Planes?

If the impossibility of nano-thermite having blown apart the Twin Towers drives Richard Gage, Steve Jones and Neils Harritt up the wall, questions that have arisen about the 9/11 crash sites and evidence suggests that all four of them were fabricated or faked (albeit in different ways). It was profoundly disturbing, therefore, when Richard Gage implied the 9/11 plane crashes were real, which contradicts the available evidence.

But we have documentary proof that Flights 11 (North Tower) and 77 (Pentagon) were not even scheduled that day, where FAA registration records show that the planes used for Flights 93 (Shanksville) and 175 (South Tower) were not taken out of service (“deregistered”) until 28 September 2005.

So how could planes that were not even in the air have crashed on 9/11? and how could planes that crashed on 9/11 have still been in the air four years later?

For many students of 9/11, their brains shut off at the very idea, even though Pilots for 9/11 Truth have established that Flight 93 was in the air that day, but that it was over Champaign-Urbana, IL, after it had allegedly crashed in Shanksville; and that Flight 175 was also in the air that day, but that it was over Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, PA, long after it had purportedly hit the South Tower. This means that the videos we have seen of the planes hitting the North and the South Towers involved some form of fakery, as I have repeatedly explained.

It won’t do to suggest that real planes of any kind–such as drones or special military aircraft–were used for that purpose, since their entry involved no loss in velocity in violation of Newton’s third law.

And, as Jack White, a legendary student of JFK, who turned his attention to 9/11, discovered, the engine component found at Church & Murray was under a steel scaffolding, sitting on a relatively undamaged sidewalk, and was the wrong make to have come from a Boeing 767. He also found FOX NEWS footage of men in FBI vests unloading something heavy from a white van, which would have come as sensational news, had Richard Gage made observations of this kind on C-SPAN:

That no plane crashed in Shanksville should be apparent to anyone who has seen what a real plane crash looks like, such as the downing of the “Malaysian 17” in Ukraine.

While that case is fascinating in its own right, the proof that we were mislead about the Pentagon extends from violation of laws of aerodynamics and physics entailed by the official flight trajectory to the more obvious consideration that the plane shown in the one frame that the Pentagon claims to show “the plane”, when compared to the image of a Boeing 757 (properly sized for comparison) was far too small to have been a Boeing 757:

Issues about the planes would be overwhelmingly more interesting to the public than talking about red-and-grey chips found in the dust, especially when–even if they were bona fide nano-thermite–cannot possibly explain how the Twin Towers were destroyed. That none of the 9/11 aircraft actually crashed and none of the passengers aboard them died is an entirely different matter, because it proves the entire “War on Terror” was a fabrication.
Too many in the movement seem to forget that a half-dozen or more of the “suicide hijackers” turned up alive and well the following day. Gage not only made none of the obvious points made here but implied that the 9/11 aircraft were real. Either way, issues are raised about his competence or his integrity.

Who was responsible and why?

More disturbing than his failure to discuss the planes that did not crash–and to imply that they were real–was his utter incapacity to answer simple, direct questions about who and why. 9/11 dates from the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990-91, which left the military-industrial complex without a boogie man to pacify the American public with regard to the “peace dividend” it would never see and a new threat to keep the taxpayer’s billions coming into their coffers. It involved collusion between the CIA, the Neo-Cons in the Department of Defense and the Mossad, where Israel would come out of 9/11 as “the big winner”.

During The Vancouver Hearings, Susan Lindauer revealed inside information that 9/11 was an “inside job.” She served as the liaison between the CIA and Saddam Hussein, who was so eager to avoid war with the U.S. that he offered to purchase 1,000,000 cars per year for the next ten years. If that was not enough, he said, make it the next twenty! Imagine where the U.S. would be economically if we had only taken up his proposal? Instead, when Susan learned of plans to attack Iraq, she protested vigorously to President Bush. For taking that step, for speaking out about her concerns over the injustice of it all, she was harassed, intimidated, imprisoned and tortured.

9/11 was conceived as an elaborate psychological operation to instill fear into the American people in order to manipulate them into supporting the political agenda of the Bush/Cheney administration, which included the invasion of several nations in the Middle East to bring about the creation of a new century of American domination of the world for the next 100 years.

The evidence supports the inference that 9/11 was a “national security event” which was authorized at the highest levels of the American government–the CIA, the NSA, the Pentagon and The White House.

It facilitated a reversal of US foreign policy and extraordinary constraints on the Constitution of the United States, which have dramatically increased the centralization of political power in the executive branch and dominating the legislative and judicial branches of government.

9/11: What happened, who was responsible and why. To watch, click here.

The creation of the Department of Homeland Security has been especially ominous, where DHS has now requisitioned more than 2 billion rounds of .40 caliber hollow point ammo, which is not even permissible in the conduct of warfare under The Geneva Conventions. Combined with more than 300 FEMA camps around the country, every American should be alarmed at the parallels with the rise of The Third Reich in Germany before WWII.

As a former Marine Corps officer, I am extremely apprehensive over the future of my country, which has been transformed from the most admired and respected nation in the world–along with our “gallant ally”‘ in the Middle East, Israel–to being the most despised and reviled. By 2014, Richard Gage should have known these things, which makes his silence about them all the more telling.

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth and the founder of Scholars for 9/11 TruthNOTE: This article originally appeared in Veterans Today in 2014 and was republished on an earlier blog of mine in 2015. It appears here on the 19th observance of the atrocities committed by Israel upon the United States–with a little help from its friends. For more, see

About VT Editors
VT Editors is a General Posting account managed by Jim W. Dean and Gordon Duff. All content herein is owned and copyrighted by Jim W. Dean and Gordon Duff
Due to the nature of independent content, VT cannot guarantee content validity.
We ask you to Read Our Content Policy so a clear comprehension of VT's independent non-censored media is understood and given its proper place in the world of news, opinion and media.

All content is owned by author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.

About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy


  1. Mr. Duff,

    There has never been a REAL grand jury convened, complete with subpoena powers. The yr 2002 thing was simply part of the cover-up. A REAL grand jury, complete with subpoena powers, needs to be convened and I doubt very much if this will happen.

    • The Grand Jury was convened to run the coverup and to silence witnesses with gag orders.

  2. In my opinion, the important thing is to get a GRAND JURY convened, with subpoena powers. IF and when this happens, everything else will come out eventually.

    LawyersCommitteefor911Inquiry(dot) org has been working on this for many months now. But to date, they have not had any success in their efforts. I hope very much that they succeed!

  3. Many people DO KNOW the truth. Pep up and learn it. I have described the Kellogg nuclear demolition systems at VT MANY times, though in a very brief form. Dimitri Khalezov further goes into much detail, only occasionally suspecting instead of fully relating some relatively minor details. The test jet crash was done late 1968, and soon after, the Kellogg nukes system was tested, seen to be successful, then mandated into the WTCs I, II, and 7. This Manhattan insurance underwriters’ mandate forced these systems in against the engineers’ advice, which fell on deaf ears like the British royalty/Rockefeller ‘ALCHEMY’ demand for the method to hopefully stop exterior aluminum siding to structural steel base material interface corrosion.

  4. Do any of my comments get read? Kellogg Corp. neutron flux generator, painted on and mixed in low level radioactive isotopes, two jets. One a rare Boeing 737-800 with overbuilt control surfaces and extended wings, the other a military version Boeing 767 tanker with reinforced leading edges like the 737-800 extended wing craft. 4,500 exploding bolts from NASA”s supplier, delivered in 1968 and 1972, pre-stationed oxy-acetylene rigs to sever the corner columns and thus initiate the nuke demolition systems. Read the very professional and detailed NON-DHS U.S. Coast Guard Report on What Hit The Pentagon On 9-11-2001. This is re-released as Paul Andrew Mitchell’s ‘9-11…An Inside Job?’. A great contribution to 9-11 science and a Rite of Passage for all 9-11 researchers. A&E sux, Richard Gage sux, for some oddball reason, Dr. James Fetzer wants to sux, Steven Jones sux, and Chris Bollyn, who got me into losing my humility about this stuff and into making comments because the cops beat him up. He sux. Can anybody read this? Please tell Jim Dean that there are no dirty words in this comment.

  5. It amazes me that even after strong and credible evidence is presented that extinguishes any notion of aforementioned theories (nanothermite) that people will still support this now debunked theory. Closed minds. I once supported the nano-termite in the first few years but when I read about mini nukes on VT I switched to this as after reading the scientific facts about nanothermite not been able to do the job of bringing down still and concrete buildings (This law requires a detonation velocity of at least 3,200 m/s to fragment concrete and 6,100 m/s to fragment steel, which is far beyond the highest recorded detonation velocity of 895 m/s for nano-thermite.). VT has sold me on the nuke theory. Why is it so hard for others to do so?

  6. That is the problem these days. Everyone has an opinion. Based on conjecture. gage is like a red herring in argument. The laws of Science govern here. At least read about them.

  7. GREAT refresh !
    I love to see R Gage discredited and… “bite the dust” like this because I have evidence that he is a phony front because of its sexual misbehavior in (after) one of its conference outside US I attended to few years after 2001.

  8. i, a sped teacher. Have you noticed that 9/11 has been the pretext for all the wars of this century? If the “official” narrative of 9/11 is BS, that would change everything. Right?

  9. LawyersCommitteefor911Inquiry(.)org > holding Zoom conference on Sept 13, regarding their request for grand jury per 18-USC-3332 > acknowledged by crooked SDNY on Nov 7, 2018 as valid.

    22 months after admitting RICO CRIMINAL EVENTS, crickets

  10. It was obvious from day one that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job. That within hours the MSM had pictures of the 19 so-called hijackers and Osama bin Laden plastered all over the front pages of newspapers way before any actual evidence-based investigation could possibly have been done is proof enough for me that those were false-flag attacks. The “official” narrative of 9/11 was BS from day one.

    The Patriot Act had been written months before 9/11. The invasion of Afghanistan had been planned months before, as well. The neocons at PNAC gave us all the heads up back in 1998, “…even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.” It was all right out in the open for all to see. Guess we just weren’t paying attention.

  11. “Unequivocal//11 Nukes” at VeteransToday

    I attended the Alex Jones and Richard Gage, four hour press conference for A&E Truth first two hour DVD documentary in May 2009. Then attended three A&E DVD events in Houston, had dinner with Gage twice. I admire his tendency, but not his lack of scientific integrity. His A&E funded U 9f Alaska, finite element analysis of WTC-7 proves NIST wrong, but ignores what did happen.

    “Exposing NIST Jenga Game” at VeteransToday

  12. The chrisitian name Danish proponent of the nano-termite thesis is Niels and not Neils. His family name is Harrit — not Harritt, as it is misspelled in one instance. I add this correction for the benefit of those who might want to look for further information concerning this person.

  13. For this 911 debacle not to front and center in every American’s concern until the truth is known and the real perps ‘hanging’, tells me that the Mind Control businesses is booming like never before. When do I get in line for my brain chip. Will it be in my next mandatory vaccination? I find my dogs to be more curious than most people I meet.

  14. The article started off soon enough with “A&E911 is not alone in attempting to place the how ahead of the who and the why,” and then proceeded to do a limited imitation of it.
    What’s the point? The “how and the why,” really doesn’t matter. And obviously, it doesn’t matter “who.”

Comments are closed.