This post has been updated for those who missed the show.
Richard Gage of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, was on Radio NZ’s Saturday Morning with Kim Hill at 9.07 am on the 21st of November, 2009. For those who missed this 36 minutes long interview, there is link to a MP3 format file here.
Richard Gage
About Richard Gage
Richard Gage is a member of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a collaboration of more than 960 architectural and engineering professionals who are re-examining the high-rise collapses of the World Trade Centre buildings in the light of scientific evidence that the collapses of the Twin Towers and WTC Building 7 were not adequately explained by the official theories outlined in the 2002 FEMA and 2005 and 2008 NIST reports. Richard will speak at a free public seminar, The Architecture of Destruction, at Te Papa on Saturday 21 November 21 from 2:00pm.
Related:
Richard Gage on KMPH Fox 26 in Fresno, CA
Richard Gage’s New Zealand Tour Getting Good Media Coverage
Richard Gage’s Wellington Presentation Gets Biggest Blueprint For Truth Audience Ever
Full page article about Richard Gage in the Wellington weekly, The Capital Times.
clareswinney.wordpress.com 
Richard Gage spoke very well on the Kim Hill show, although she was quite rude. She kept interrupting him and made repeated attempts to undermine him, by bringing in so-called evidence that has been thoroughly discredited. She even tried to get him to talk about his view of evolution and asked him if he was a “conspiracy theorist” in her desperation to avoid dealing with what he was telling her. Richard told her she had put psychological barriers up to avoid facing the truth. I agree and it was very instructive for listeners to hear this. She demonstrated that even a professional can have a great problem facing self-evident facts, confirming the effectiveness of what Hitler’s propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, called the big lie.
Scientists Confirm the Effectiveness of The Big Lie – People Will Go To Extraordinary Lengths to Create False Justifications for Government Misdeeds
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2009/08/scientists-confirm-effectiveness-of-big.html
Kim Hill sounded like an unhinged cat lady, she came off sounding like an evasive weirdo, she even asked Richard Gage if their were planes involved in 911, and mockingly laughed at him on numerous occasions, she completely discredited herself as a journalist.
620 people attended the presentation at Te Papas sounding theater. there was sustained applause at the end of the event.
I raised the volume and compressed it:
[audio src="http://www.radiodujour.com/mp3/20091121_kimhill_richardgage.mp3" /]
Here’s the WSFM interview:
November 20, 2009
Architect Richard Gage appeared on Australian Radio WSFM’s Jonesy and Amada in the Morning and explained why he (and 950+ licensed Architects and Engineers) want a more THOROUGH investigation in the 9-11 World Trade Centre attacks.
Thank-you Edward. He got a far fairer hearing on the Australian station didn’t he, but then her odd behavior did give him the opportunity to shine in the face of adversity.
Kim Hill sounded like a genuine nutcase – Richard Gage spoke in a professional sane manner.
Perhaps if Kim Hill took the time to look at the science instead of hysterical childish name calling we may get a balanced intelligent interview from her in the future – perhaps.
Nice 1 Claire. Appreciate your spending time covering this. Kim Hill can be frustrating to listen to but by quizzing him about “conspiracy theories”, cruise missiles etc she at least gave Mr Gage a chance to address those associations – it helps to engage the more conservative audience. I’m just listening to it now on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gliq-iopiOw
Thanks dan. Good job on the video. I will post it elsewhere. Talking of video, I heard that Jeremy has been trying to upload the footage of the event to YouTube and he is having a lot of trouble for some reason.
The problem is ‘psychological barriers’ the interviewer is faced with truths that she cannot understand. This is grounds for sympathy and support.
Kim Hill interviewing David Ray Griffin:
August 15, 2008
Kim Hill of New Zealand National Radio interviews David Ray Griffin, one of the foremost exponents of process philosophy and theology, who in recent years has become one of the leading critics of the official account of the attacks of 11 September 2001.
[audio src="http://www.radiodujour.com/people/griffin_david_ray/mp3/20080815_kimhill_davidraygriffin.mp3" /]
radiodujour = Edward Rynearson
David Ray Griffin = http://davidraygriffin.com
A Man of Steel
September 9, 2009
Richard Gage talks to Alex Jones about his recent appearance at the Commonwealth Club, his take on Charlie Sheen demanding a meeting with Obama to discuss the 9/11 cover-up and his experience participating in National Geographic Channel’s “9/11: Science and Conspiracy”.
Pingback: The Progressive Mind » Richard Gage’s Wellington Presentation Draws Biggest Blueprint For Truth Audience Ever | 911Blogger.com
Pingback: STJ911 Blog » Blog Archive » Richard Gage’s Wellington Presentation Draws Biggest Blueprint For Truth Audience Ever
“The problem is ‘psychological barriers’ the interviewer is faced with truths that she cannot understand. This is grounds for sympathy and support”
Phil – yes you are right, people like Kim Hill do need support when faced with truths which challenge her ingrained belief system.
It’s not uncommon at all for people to lash out with nonsense and make fools of themselves in this situation.
Kim Hill calls Richard Gage a conspiracy theorist.
She fails to recognise that the literal definition of that term includes her own belief that a bunch of men in a cave conspired to hijack planes and crash them into key buildings.
In other words, the official version actually is a theory about a conspiracy.
It also happens to be a theory for which very little evidence has been provided.
But Kim isn’t interested in the evidence.
As someone who attended Richard Gage’s presentation at Te Papa and who thus heard the evidence he presented, I wish to comment on Kim Hill’s Saturday morning interview with Richard Gage, founding member of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
In a professionally-conducted interview, the guest is asked questions to elicit his views. This does not mean that he is given a free ride. Indeed, a capable interviewer will cross-examine him with a view to exposing inconsistencies and weaknesses in his argument.
However, to expose inconsistencies, the guest must first be allowed to set out his case. In this instance, Hill was determined to prevent Gage from doing so, shouting him down and changing the subject by introducing such monumental irrelevancies as evolution and Dan Brown, just when he was about to present a piece of key evidence.
One wonders why. If 9/11 ‘truthers’ are so loony, why not let them condemn themselves out of their own mouths? By preventing Gage from speaking and resorting to mockery at every opportunity, Hill has only succeeded in raising the question: “What is this evidence that is considered too dangerous to be discussed freely?”
This interview told us a lot more about Kim Hill and National Radio than it did about Richard Gage and 9/11.
Kim Hill is clearly an idiot!
she deserves to lose her job.
Dale Doran writes…
Hi Kim,
My name is Dale Doran and I am from Australia. I was surprised when I first heard you would host Richard Gage on your show to discuss the latest scientific discoveries backed up by cold hard evidence regarding the destruction of the 3 WTC towers. I also believed that given your experience as a journalist and radio host that the interview would be not only professional, but balanced. What I heard was far from being professional and balanced. You were extremely rude, continuously cut Richard off, bounced back and forth between topics, and most of all refused to acknowledge the scientific evidence he presented. Richard Gage is a building professional and speaks from his knowledge and expertise. He cannot coment or speculate on outrageous claims you forced upon him like what happened at the Pentagon or why people have not come forward with information. You tried so hard to make him associate himself with with these outrageous claims so you could then label him as just another ‘conspiracy theorist’ and to his credit he could see what you were doing and didn’t fall into this trap. I have met and spoken in depth with Richard personally and until you can breakdown the psychological barriers you currently have, no evidence he could present, or even a outright confession by George W Bush himself could get you to acknowledge the evidence. We all had these barriers at one point and the truth speaks to each one us in different ways and when it does, it is the truth that sets us free.
Please let me remind you that the original purpose of journalism in conjunction with the media was to report on facts, be the corporate watchdog and keep the overlords of nations accountable. Your job is not to be opinionated and manipulate your listeners to agree with you but to present information in as factual a manner as possible so the listeners can decide. We’re sick and tired of having our every thought manipulated by the corporate media. Let’s get one thing right, the corporate media is losing it’s stranglehold on the minds of the masses and the free media through the internet is now the main stream. We’re the ones uncovering facts and information. We’re doing the media’s job. You are the ones who should be uncovering the facts not perpetuating falsities and speculations in an attempt to manipulate peoples minds, and you probably don’t even realise you’re doing it.
I encourage you to look into what Richard speaks about, move past the BBC interview and focus on the cold hard scientific evidence. Once you do that you’ll see that the evidence is undeniable. All we’re doing is asking questions and in a so called ‘democracy’ it is the most patriotic thing you can do. Once we can no longer ask questions of our governments we know that we live in tyranny.
Regards,
Dale Doran
RESPONSE from Radio NZ National
Dear Dale
Thanks for your email, one of many we received concerning this interview.
I’m collating all the feedback received since Saturday and will present it to Kim.
Cheers
MARK
Producer
Saturday Morning with Kim Hill
Radio New Zealand National
Kim Hill said during the show on the 28th, that she did not go to the presentation in Te Papa because “his DVD contained more than enough rubbish for one day.”
She said much interest had been expressed in the show and read out some of the contents of e-mails she had received just after the 10.00 am news. They included the following quotes:
“Poorest interview I have ever heard…corporate whore..”, “Disgusting piece of trash..she should be fired. What a horrible stupid vile woman,” “Most dreadful interview…,” “It was an appalling interview,” “Kim Hill, you are evil, evil, evil!”
She read further quotes from e-mails between 11-12 also, which included the following: “patronising and an embarrassment to your good show” – won’t be listening again. And one that mentioned Richard Gage will go down in history as a light bearer – hopefully you will become a light bearer too.
I had to force myself to listen to Kim Hill (or ‘Kill Him’, as I’ve heard her called recently), since I gave up listening to her a long time ago. Her pathologically inflated ego would be pitiful were it not that she is a journalist. This ‘interview’ was, by any standards, a disgrace not only to National Radio, but to New Zealand. I cringed with embarrassment.
There is, of course, another, altogether more sinister explanation. Maybe she was doing her job – in the sense of following orders … but let’s not go there.
She was doing her job. In order to do her job, she had to keep the information at arms length.
This information when it goes public will reveal that journalists were either “in on it” or “completely out of it”. Either will reflect poorly.
Pingback: Richard Gage’s 9/11 Presentation in Auckland, New Zealand, Silences The Debunkers with PROOF that WTC Twin Towers were pulverized by High Tech EXPLOSIVES « Amadon Fidelis
Let’s just face some simple facts.
Skyscrapers MUST hold themselves up. They must also sway in the wind. The people who design skyscrapers MUST figure out how much steel and how much concrete they are going to put on every level before they even dig the hole for the foundation.
After EIGHT YEARS why don’t we have a table specifying the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE that were on every level of the WTC? The NIST report does not even specify the TOTAL for the concrete. The total for the steel is in three places. So even if the planes did it that 10,000 page report is CRAP!
Conspiracies are irrelevant. The Truth Movement should be marching on all of the engineering schools in the country.
Watch that Purdue simulation. If a 150 ton airliner crashes near the top of a skyscraper at 440 mph isn’t the building going to sway? Didn’t the survivors report the building “moving like a wave”? So why do the core columns in the Purdue video remain perfectly still as the plane comes in?
That is the trouble with computer simulations. If they are good, they are very good. But if they have a defect either accidental or deliberate they can be REALLY STUPID once you figure out the flaws.
The distribution of steel and concrete is going to affect the sway of a skyscraper whether it is from the wind or an airliner.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
How much does one complete floor assembly weigh?
You know those square donut floor slabs? They were 205 ft square with a rectangular hole for the core. There was a steel rebar mesh embedded in the concrete which was poured onto corrugated steel pans which were supported by 35 and 60 foot trusses. There has been talk about those things pancaking on each other for years.
But has anyone ever said what the whole thing weighed? Why haven’t we seen that A LOT in EIGHT YEARS? The concrete alone is easy to compute, about 600 tons. But the concrete could not be separated from the entire assembly, the knuckles of the trusses were embedded in the concrete. So what did the whole thing weigh and why haven’t the EXPERTS mentioned that A LOT?
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
So why hasn’t Richard Gage and his buddies produced a table with the TONS of STEEL and TONS fo CONCRETE that were on every level of the WTC? How much computing power do they have compared to the early 1960s when the buildings were designed? I asked Gage about that in May of 2008 at Chicago Circle Campus and he got a surprised look on his face and gave me this LAME excuse about the NIST not releasing accurate blueprints. Gravity hasn’t changed since the 1960s. They should be able to come up with some reasonable numbers.
Hats off to Kim Hill. She did a great interview. And for those of us who believe there has been a cover-up (myself included), Richard Gage was less than convincing. Come on people – this is an interview not a free advertisement. Interjections adn interuptions keep the flow going and challenge the views being presented. On more than a couple of occasions, Gage was left floundering. Don’t blame the messenger.
It was such a great interview that she was inundated with complaints.
I am a Canadian that listened to the Richard Gage/Kim Hill interview online. Within 60 seconds I did not like anything about Kim Hill. I don’t like her face, or her bitchy haircut either. A woman like Kim Hill would be in for a rude awakening in she ever moved to Canada. A woman like Kim Hill would never get hired to do any radio show here in Canada. If she got hired as a secretary in a dental office she would gone in a week.
I can not believe how many times she would ask Mr. Gage a question and then in just a few seconds when he was in the middle of answering , she would interrupt him. She did this the entire program. She doesn’t genuinely want to hear what Mr. Gage has to say. She doesn’t want to discuss the presence of nanothermate at the WTC. To Kim Hill, finding Nanothermate in dust and steel samples at the WTC is a normal phenomenom. To a normal person, it’s incriminating evidence.
Her tactics of asking extremely off topic questions such as questioning Mr. Gage about his own personal beliefs regarding Darwins theory of evolution have only one purpose: To turn otherwise receptive people away from the incredible information about Sept. 11th that Mr. Gage presented. She tried unsuccessfully to make Mr. Gage take a side on the subject of the theory of evolution so that people who have a different opinion than Mr. Gage’s on THAT subject will say, “Well, I don’t agree with Mr. Gage’s views on the theory of evolution, so I don’t want to hear what he has to say about the destruction of the WTC buildings.”
Such tactics are the tactics of someone who knows they are defeated.
Nice try Kim, you bitch.