Help KPFA and Project Censored!

Dear Friends of KPFA and Project Censored,

Mickey Huff and I have been volunteers hosts on the Thursday Morning Mix show on KPFA (8:00-9:00 AM) since late December. We have covered some very important topics including: US Economy and the Collapse of the Dollar, Immigrants Rights, Racism and White Privilege, Media as Entertainment, and the Crisis in Higher Education in California. .

We volunteered because KPFA is in a funding crisis and needs to be fully supported.

  • We believe that there is no topic that should not be covered on KPFA community free speech radio, especially the most censored news stories that we feature on our website ( and in our annual yearbook—Censored 2011.
  • We will be offering special premiums during our Thursday show this week February 24 and the following March 3. On these shows we will play segments of speeches from the Understanding Deep Politics Conference in Santa Cruz last May. This unique nine hour DVD features, Peter Dale Scot, Michael Parenti, Dahiia Wasfi, Ellen Brown, David Ray Griffin, Annie Machon and others. The talks openly discuss the underlying issues of covert power in the US that had led us into war, conflicts, economic decline, 9/11, election fraud, torture, renditions, and loss of civil liberties. This entire set of DVDs will be offer for a pledge of $125 to support KPFA.
  • In addition, we will be featuring a 54 minute DVD of Richard Gage from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth presenting scientific information at Sonoma State University last fall on the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings 1-2 & 7.

  • The Gage DVD will be offered for a $60 donation to KPFA. There no conspiracy theories on this DVD, only hard scientific facts that raise troubling questions regarding the truth of 9/11 Commission report.
  • The book premium is Peter Dale Scott’s new book American War Machine available for an $100 support gift to KPFA. Peter will be on air with us at 8:30 discussing Deep Pokutucs, the CIA Global Drug Connections, and the road to Afghanistan.
  • Every American deserves an opportunity to address questions and get full transparent answers to the important socio-political issues of the day. Without full information we often do not know what questions to ask the higher powers or how to challenge their hidden authority.
  • Listen to our KPFA Morning mix Show 94.1 FM from 8-9:00 AM Thursdays or on-line at Call in to pledge support to KPFA at: 510-848-5732 or Toll free: 1-800-439-5732 and keep free speech radio alive and on the air. Out of area folks can listen and pledge on-line at

Or Mail a check to:

Development: In Support of the Morning Mix Project Censored Show

KPFA Radio,
1929 MLK Jr. Way,
Berkeley, CA 94704

Let us know if we may thank you on the air!


Peter Phillips
Co-Host of the Project Censored Morning Mix Show President: Media Freedom Foundation

Mickey Huff,
Director Project Censored/Media Freedom Foundation Co-Host of the Project Censored Morning Mix Show

14 thoughts on “Help KPFA and Project Censored!”

  1. 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:

    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:

    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 elevators 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.”

  2. It appears that you’re running your own “Project Censored,” since my comments on Gage’s bunk weren’t posted here. Some “truth” movement…

  3. Comments are posted automatically. Yours was flagged as spam.

    So we’ll put it up, now that we know you sent it.

  4. Thanks, Mark. When my comments disappeared, I simply assumed that they were being treated as they are on most 9/11 “truth movement” web sites, where I’m usually banned immediately. You and I apparently have different opinions of what constitutes “scientific information” or “hard scientific facts,” but if you honestly believe that Mr. Gage’s presentation is worth 60 bucks to anyone, please feel free to address some of the questions I raised about his version of science.
    I’d be mortified if my alma mater hosted something like that, and have difficulty understanding how he attracts and keeps audiences anywhere, but especially in places of higher education. It’s incomprehensible to me that university students and faculty pay to listen to him, and then do so seemingly uncritical of his numerous flagrant inaccuracies and falsehoods.

  5. This not a “truth movement Web site,” although I do think the official narrative of 9/11 is preposterous, and that we therefore badly need a new investigation.

    As for Gage’s claims and your analysis thereof, let’s let other visitors to NFU weigh in, and you can answer them, etc.

  6. Albrury:

    What are you talking about? “more” qualified, competent, and honest people”?

    Are you getting paid by one of the contractors/players involved with 9/11 events and you have the nerve to call Richard Gage dishonest?

    I would call you dishonest by claiming that the NIST investigators are more “qualified, competent, and honest people”.

    How could a decent investigation be conducted when all of the debris was carted away and to take so much as a fragment or dust sample was made a felony crime?

    What’s that all about?

    You are covering up for NIST, that’s what I get out of your bullying, irrational attacks on Richard Gage.

    You completely avoid the subject that the WTC bldgs were the very FIRST steel skyscraper bldgs to fall into their footprints from an intense fire.

    Hey, Albrury, can i get a job to attack researchers ? After all, times are tough, and I could sure the money too. how much are you getting paid?



  7. The original post is about helping KPFA and Project Censored, and you don’t mention a thing about the original post. There is no mention about Richard Gage in this post yet you have launched a personal attack against Richard Gage.

    And you are using your comment as free advertising in your personal war against anyone who doesn’t accept the NIST report at face value. Anyone who doesn’t accept the NIST Report 1000% is a traitor in your eyes.

    I think you are barking up the wrong tree, or you are getting paid handsomely to distribute your rubbish against people who are questioning the NIST report.

  8. Please cite the law stating that building debris from a catastrophe has to be moved additional times at great expense in one of the world’s priciest zip codes, John, instead of being sensibly scrapped when its evidentiary value has been diminished to practically nothing. WTC steel and other debris was examined on site by SEAoNY, PANJNY, FEMA BPAT, and ASCE engineers, among others, and selected samplings of structural steel are stored in Gaithersburg and at JFK Airport. Thousands of tons of structural steel didn’t get to the point of being scrapped without being seen and handled by numerous people, including controlled demolition experts and union ironworkers, who weren’t all in on a plot to fool you, and weren’t all blind and stupid. I’d also like to know how much you’re being paid to attack my honesty and motives, plus the integrity and competence of more than 200 NIST scientists and engineers, since you’ve elected to toss in that worn-out 9/11 “truth movement” canard instead of addressing any of the many reasons I’ve stated here for questioning Richard Gage’s junk science and other malarkey being passed off as research. Is it enough to send him a big donation, as he requests prominently on his web site and while he’s circling the globe slandering and libeling the US government and others by innuendo, or even with dishonest specifics?

    9/11 was the “FIRST” time steel skyscrapers were ever hit at high speed by hijacked airliners with ~9500 gallons of jet fuel aboard, but you’d actually have to show evidence that it didn’t happen instead of relying on sophistry. SFRM is code mandated in all steel-framed hi-rises for a reason, and it’s less effective when knocked off by planes. It also doesn’t protect steel indefinitely from overheating, and water pressure’s helpful in fighting fires. What’s truly impossible is secretly blowing up three huge hi-rise buildings in a busy downtown area, leaving no severed steel in the debris piles with cutter charge signatures on the ends, and doing it all with no plausible motive. There was no asbestos in two of the three collapsed WTC buildings, the third had very little, Silverstein lost billions even with the insurance insisted on by his creditors, and US troops were all but in Afghanistan with a full mandate from congress to attack the perpetrators of this latest al Qaeda atrocity before the South Tower fell.

    Since you brought it up, I’m sure you could get a non-paying job as one of Gage’s self-professed experts, but you’d definitely need some solid science or structural engineering credentials to join Dr. Sunder’s team at NIST, preferably a doctorate. They conducted as “decent” an investigation as humanly possible, so please spend some time reading their reports before calling them liars, instead of relying strictly on 9/11 “truth movement” web sites whose lies aren’t simply alleged.

  9. If there’s no mention of Richard Gage here, Susan, one of us is on the wrong page. I’m probably the guilty party, since Mr. Crispin tells us that web sites selling DVDs of Gage’s presentations and run by people claiming that “the official narrative of 9/11 is preposterous” aren’t 9/11 “truth movement” sites.

  10. I’m not offended, but I’m getting really bored. If you can’t question Gage’s claims without this shrill ad hominem nonsense, we will have to shut this down.

  11. I questioned Richard Gage’s claims in all honesty and with detailed reasons for doing it, Mark, and have yet to see a sincere, on-topic response to any of the points in my February 26, 2011 4:26 am post. I also haven’t resorted to ad hominem or nonsense, so I’m wondering if you mistook my comments for those of “John Harris,” whose only arguments so far are that I’m being paid by someone to post here, and am bullying Mr. Gage with irrational attacks.
    Being “really bored” when asked to explain someone’s claims is one way to avoid doing it, and shutting down a discussion, even a one-sided one like this, is another. I’m used to both, but am still seeking a thoughtful response to my questions here. If “shut this down” means banning me from commenting, you’re following the script despite your denial that this is a 9/11 “truth movement” web site. Been there and had it done to me on too many of them.

  12. “Let [Lawrence Wright] Tell You About 9/11” in The Looming Tower, a Pulitzer Prize-winning book written by someone who actually bothered to learn about it. I’d recommend reading NCSTAR 1 and 1A also, especially if you’re going to claim that the NIST investigators are wrong. Some off-key balladeer named Bob A. Feldman wouldn’t be at the top of my list of resources on the topic.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.