9/11 Truth w/ American Institute of Architects & Engineers CEO Richard Gage |EP926

[00:00:41] are created equal, but they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. By Liberty and the Humanity. If Liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.

[00:01:13] Great again. The Big Mig. The Big Mig Show. Welcome back to The Big Mig Show. I'm your host, Lance Migliaccio. And of course my co-host, George Valentin. We are the tip of the spear. If Liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. And you know that's the plan on this show. Each and every single episode, every time you turn in,

[00:01:41] we're going to bring you the evidence, the truth, the facts, the sauce, the receipts, give it any name you want. And we're going to bring you the right guest to back it up. Tonight will not be any different. Our plan, of course, is to educate you so that you can take that education. And instead of listening to mainstream media, instead of going to what the sources are that they want you to listen to, you're going to go to the alternative sources. And we're going to give you the facts to share with your friends, your family, even your liberal next door neighbor.

[00:02:10] And by giving you this truth, hopefully we're going to unify the country. Because you know, on the big MIG, there's only one thing we think. It is a uniparty, plain and simple. There are lots of questions. Questions about the JFK assassination. Questions about 9-11. Questions about Hillary Clinton destroying those emails. Seth Ritch laptop and so many other topics that we all want to know the truth. But that's not what they want us to do, right?

[00:02:36] And you know when you put the truth out, if you're being attacked, it's because you have become a threat. So the road to tyranny is paved with people telling you to stop questioning everything. And on the big MIG show, we want you to question us. We want you to question our guests. Question the facts we're putting out. But at the same time, we want you to know the truth. And you're going to find that the people we bring here normally provide that to you with all the supporting documents. George Ballantine, running and gunning, snapping necks and cashing checks.

[00:03:05] How are you, brother? I'm good, man. I'm actually sitting here because the air condition broke. So I got like three fans going on. I don't hear it. So you've got the audio under control. It would sound like a tornado in there if you did. Well, you know what? Thanks to this beautiful road caster duo mixer. You know, I can get rid of that background noise. Otherwise, you'd be like. Yeah, we'd have the whooshing there. We wouldn't know what was happening. We think you're under it. And then I would hear from Mrs. Gage. How do you have on Richard on the show with that background noise?

[00:03:35] Mrs. Gage. You know, listen, I got it. I'm going to say this before we even talk about Richard. I just want to say that it's not always the support teams for some of the guests are nothing like Gail Gage. I have to tell you that even people with big names do not have somebody behind the scenes. She is super organized. I actually felt bad we missed something that we were supposed to fill out. No, no. I don't know how we missed it. No, it's not we. It's not we on this. Is he saying? It's you, Lance. Maybe it was me.

[00:04:03] But George had to take care of it at the last minute, like everything else, and get it done. Hey, at the end of the day, it's done and done. But I have to apologize to Gail on air because we're supposed to fill this form out. I've never seen a form like that before. And I just want to say, Gail, my hat's off to you. You're doing a great job behind the scenes with Richard. Now I know why the website looks like it does. Richard's got an amazing website. We'll get into that. But look, before we start, you know what we got to do, guys. We got to set the mood. You know that's all part of the plan here. Sometimes it's fun. Sometimes it's serious.

[00:04:33] Sometimes we just bring you a good joke or something heartwarming. George, set that mood, brother. Let's rock and roll. A politician dies. Instead of going straight to heaven or hell, a spirit appears to him and says that he gets to choose whether he goes to heaven or hell. The politician replies that, of course, he wants to go to heaven. The spirit tells him that before he chooses, he has to visit both places so each one will get a fair chance. First, they visit heaven. It looks pretty nice. Big fluffy clouds, angels singing and playing harps. Everyone seeming to enjoy themselves.

[00:05:03] The politician is pleased if a bit underwhelmed. Hell, on the other hand, is magnificent. It's the most beautiful place the politician has ever seen, and everyone there is having the time of their lives. A beautiful garden. It makes heaven look dull and boring in comparison. I can't believe I'm saying this, says the politician, but I think I'd rather go to hell. Very well, says the spirit. Turn around. When the politician turns around, though, hell appears to be completely different than it had been less than a minute ago. All of the attractions are gone. Everything is on fire, and the people are screaming in agony. I don't understand, cries the politician.

[00:05:33] This isn't what you showed me before. Well, that was the campaign. Now you voted. And you know on the Big Mig we only bring truth. You know that's the truth. Don't act like it's not. We've seen these politicians do it over and over and over again on both sides of the aisle. You hear all the amazing things they're going to do before they get in. They convince you that there's the best people on the planet.

[00:05:59] Then they get in there, and it's no longer government for the people by the people. It's no longer we the people. It's a bunch of politicians lining their pockets, getting rich, participating in multiple crimes, giving themselves things like sovereign immunity so they almost believe they're untouchable. And that's what happens. So tonight we have a special guest. If you don't know who he is, you should know. His name is Richard Gage, AIA architect.

[00:06:28] And I want to welcome him. He's from the San Francisco Bay Area, and he's been a member of the American Institute. It appears for a long time. He is the founder and CEO of Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth. I love the title of that because it tells you exactly what he's going to do tonight. He's leading the charge for a New World Trade Center investigation along with his courageous wife, Gail, at richardgage911.org.

[00:06:57] Look, he was interested in researching the destruction of the WTC high-rise after hearing startling conclusions of a reluctant 9-11 researcher, David Ray Griffin, on the radio in 2006, which launched his own unyielding quest for the truth about 9-11. The organization he founded, AE911 Truth, now numbers more than 3,600. Listen to that number. That is a lot of experts.

[00:07:23] 3,600 architects and engineers demanding a new investigation into the destruction of the three World Trade Center high-rise buildings. We're going to be talking about everything, Building 7 and all the rest of it. And I have some background in demolition. Got trained in it years ago. And I can tell you that nothing about the World Trade Center makes sense.

[00:07:47] If it doesn't look like it wasn't what they told you, then it's only because all you did was watch mainstream media. Richard's going to be exposing their soft underbelly tonight. And I really respect and appreciate him for that. George, let's bring Richard in so that the audience can... You know, before we do, I want to bet Gail is smiling because she's probably never got this much recognition from another show. But Gail, the good woman, maybe you could teach Lance how to make that for him so he can send it out to him. Yes.

[00:08:15] You know, I would appreciate that, Gail. I really would. Yeah, that's a little blow even coming from George, even though he takes some cheap shots. You guys know that's part of the show. Richard, welcome to the... Well, go ahead. You're still going to stop me. Welcome to the big, big show, Richard Gage. How you doing? I feel good. Thank you, guys. Nice to be here. In fact, it's an honor. It's an honor to have you, sir. Yeah, we are excited you're here.

[00:08:41] You know, this show, there's lots of things that we don't trust when it comes to the government giving us answers. They always seem to be well-crafted. 9-11 has been a hot topic all over the Internet for a very long time. There are lots of questions about the planes, lots of questions. How did Building 7 come down? We've seen the video where they said, pull it. Of course, we've seen that. We've seen the Israelis celebrating.

[00:09:08] We've seen behind-the-scenes photos where there's obviously ordinance that would normally be used for, you know, demolition like this. So there's lots of questions. So, you know, George, you've got a video here. I don't know if this came for Richard. Do we want to start with that or do we want to let Richard start? Listen, I'm going to follow Gail's instructions on this one and let Richard do the shit. I ain't stupid. Richard's going to show all the stuff he wants. I do have a video of Richard if you want me to put it up. That's fine.

[00:09:39] It's up to you. I mean, it's a good video. I got lots and lots of videos to share with your audience. All right. You know what? I'm going to break ranks. I'm showing it. He's pulling another video. It's from your day. Yeah, it's from you, though. So I think it's good to show to people before we get going. It's just like, you know, I'll wake up. Let's do it. Gail, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. You know, you're so busy. You knew you're not going to do it. But no. This is it. What is it? This is what?

[00:10:10] I'm coming here. You can't play mostly. It's cool. I know. Thank you. I've got a team. The back. The types of biology that you get. You deals. With your spirit. So. Don't. Well, not to.

[00:11:07] This is a new video. This is a new video. This is a new video. Oh my God! I just got... I think it was a...

[00:11:36] ...it was a... ...it was a... ...it was a... ...it was a... ...it was a... ...it was... ...it was... ...it was a...

[00:12:03] ...a series of videos of the planes hitting the towers and people screaming ...do one thing very well and that is to put people in trauma. And it has nothing whatsoever to do with the destruction of the three towers. So I rarely show planes hitting buildings. In fact, NIST says the fires burned mostly 90% outside of the towers. And the rest of the fuel was gone in 10 minutes.

[00:12:35] So I find that that... ...that kind of footage shuts people down and doesn't contribute to the technical argument that we intend to present. And that video is not on our website for that reason. No, I think it was... Well, Richard, let me do this though. I want the audience to know who you are. Can you share, you know, a quick Cliff Notes version of your background? And then, obviously, putting out information like this and being over the target like I know you are ...or having you looked at a lot of your material.

[00:13:03] I'd like you to just also comment on how it's been, what kind of an impact it's had on your life. So just go ahead and give them the Cliff Notes version of both. Sure. I've been an architect for 30 years now. And 18 years ago, I was shocked, as you mentioned in the introduction, to hear this evidence for the first time. In fact, I had no idea that there was a third tower that came down.

[00:13:26] And I'm one of 90,000 members of the American Institute of Architects who didn't even get one bulletin on this, the third worst structural failure in modern history after the Twin Towers. So that is, just kind of woke me up listening to David Ray Griffin at the Grand Lake Theater the next night. And boy, was I in for a rude awakening.

[00:13:53] All of this evidence that we're going to be looking at today, or most of it, was presented by him in a very academic fashion. And I had to find out if this was true or not. I researched it, found out it was, took it to the architects I worked with, about 14 of them. And they were, in fact, blown away by the material that I brought in. They all signed the petition demanding a new investigation of all three World Trade Center skyscrapers.

[00:14:22] And now, as you mentioned, we have 3,600. That's a big number. I have to ask you, because obviously when people come out and they start putting out the truth, has there been, have you had any, you know, have anybody threatened you? Have they come out to your family? Have you had any warnings? Anything like that in particular that's come your direction? No, nothing. Okay. Thank God. Yeah, very fortunate. And I'm happy to hear that.

[00:14:49] So I guess let's, George, I don't know how you want to do this, but I think we should let him get right into that PowerPoint. Yeah, here we go. Boom, George on point. You see how quick? He's good. He's really good. Yeah, we don't want, it takes a lot of courage to look at this information and, and a lot more after you watch those planes hitting the towers and hearing people screaming, unfortunately. But I'll drive that point home.

[00:15:16] Um, so we've, we've, we're going to do that, uh, tonight. We're going to dare to know the facts. And I mentioned the building seven. We go all around the country to architects and engineering conventions, and we present them with the video of building seven's collapse. And we go, uh, yeah, it's a controlled demolition. And we go, yeah. Did you know when that happened? Uh, no. Uh, 9 11. Well, that's not a twin tower.

[00:15:45] No, it's not. There were three towers. So we go through the whole song and dance with them. And they're finally agreeing to sign our petition, usually at the end of that discussion. Building seven was easily the largest building in most of our states, but they looked dwarfed in New York next to the, what was once at the time, the tallest buildings in the world. So, uh, it was, it's been swept under the rug.

[00:16:14] Most engineers are structural engineers. Don't even know about this building. It, it, it, it took NIST, the National Institute of Standards Technology, uh, seven years to come out with a report because they were just hoping everybody would forget about it. And meanwhile, they're fumble, fumbling that football. It's part of the World Trade Center complex, just about a football field a length away from the North Tower. And here it is fine after the towers have come down.

[00:16:42] Uh, it had a few, uh, uh, structural steel pieces damaged. Uh, but NIST says this is not, uh, a significant factor in the building's collapse. On the right, you see the building standing after the towers, uh, come down. But about seven hours later at 520, this is what happens. The East Penthouse and the upper left falls in an isolated event.

[00:17:09] And then seven seconds after that, we have the entire building doing this. Have you guys seen this before on TV somewhere? Yes. Like in Las Vegas? Yes. I mean, a hundred percent is controlled demolition right there. Sure. So, we're gonna dive into it, find out what happened, because NIST was tasked to do this report and they produced a thousand-page piece of obfuscation, a Potemkin village. And this is their final result on it.

[00:17:37] What we found was that uncontrolled building fires caused an extraordinary event. The collapse of World Trade Center 7 was primarily due to fires. Fires. Okay. Well, let's look at those fires. As you can see, they're few, they're small, and they're scattered throughout the building. Well, wait a minute. Not one of these type one fire-resistive steel frame structures has ever come down by fire. We'll get to that.

[00:18:06] Um, but, uh, here's the fire, the area of NIST's initiation of collapse, where they said the whole thing started because of these incredible fires. But as you can see, they're burnt out. But in their computer simulation, they show those fires burning at the time of the collapse, because their collapse initiation theory relies on those fires burning at the time of the collapse. It's in a thermal expansion theory.

[00:18:31] They're saying that these fires caused these beams to expand and push a grid off of its seat on this particular column here, 79. So none of that could have happened, first of all, because the fires were burned out more than an hour and a half, but many, many other reasons, which we go into on our webinar, which you can see on our website.

[00:18:52] No steel frame fire protected structure has ever collapsed, even with much hotter, larger and longer lasting fires in these buildings. Not before, and certainly not after, even though we have these incredibly fully engulfed buildings in fires. We've never lost one. So this is unprecedented. Well, what is precedented? How about controlled demolition?

[00:19:22] On the right, we have a series of them. On the left, the 11 videos that we have of building seven's collapse. Is there any similarity? Yeah, they look to be the same, which in these things is not like the others would not apply in this particular matchup. Yeah. I mean, it should have been the first hypothesis that was considered by NIST, given that no steel frame fire protected structures ever collapsed due to fire.

[00:19:51] And yet it was put on their website 10 years later as a frequently asked, very frequently asked question that they finally had to answer. So we have to look at the features of controlled demolition and ask ourselves, do any of them match up? Okay. Feature number one, is there a sudden onset of the building?

[00:20:16] Well, here's Dan Rather looking at it for the first time using his intuitive faculties to figure out what he's looking at. What you're seeing are high shots. Now, here we're going to show you a videotape of the collapse of the shelf. Describe that. Now we go to videotape the collapse of this building. Hi. Yipper. In there. That's boy guy. Yuga. Tomato. Amazing, incredible. Pick your word.

[00:20:47] For the third time today. It's reminiscent of those fictions we've all seen too much in television before when a building was deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock it down. Oh, excuse me? What was that? Dan's saying deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock down. Yeah, well that's exactly what it looks like, right? That, unfortunately, has never said those words after 9-11.

[00:21:11] Unfortunately, we have never seen this building come down being shown this video on mainstream television with like two exceptions. And it's just, again, been swept under the rug. Feature number two. Is there a straight down symmetrical progression? Let's look from West Street. Pretty straight down, pretty symmetrical. How do you do that?

[00:21:36] You have to remove all of the 24 core columns at once within a millisecond of each other and followed about a second later by the perimeter columns. And then repeat that on every floor. That's how you bring a building down symmetrically. Do these fires have the capability to accomplish that? That's how easy it gets, guys.

[00:22:03] Not any, because there's plenty of examples of failed controlled demolitions. Richard, what's the melting point of structural steel? Isn't it like 2550 degrees or something? We'll get to that. Yeah, okay, great. And so, but take a look at this one. At the end here we have, we have, they tip over and they stop. I mean, if all the explosions don't go off perfectly, things like that happen.

[00:22:31] So, we have the free fall acceleration. How fast is this building coming down? Free fall is like a bowling ball falling out of the sky. And this is clocked by physics teacher David Chandler and many others. And yes, it's falling at free fall. What does that mean? That means, well, NIST actually confirms this. Only after seven years of denying it first, they finally confirm it.

[00:23:00] Okay, you got me there. It came down at free fall. What does that mean? That means all of the columns had to be removed. If not at once, the core columns first, second later, the perimeter columns. And again, repeat that on every floor. That's the only way you get free fall. Why? Because there's 40,000 tons of structural steel resistance in this building, three to five times

[00:23:30] stronger than it needed to be to avoid free fall. So we have not one of these 80 columns in this building giving any resistance. Where did it go? Well, let's find out because the building falls like a house of cards into a pile just four to six stories tall. This was a moment resisting steel frame and brace frame building.

[00:23:59] Any natural collapse, we'd see what looks like a building after a collapse, right? We don't have the concrete pulverized to powder. We don't have the columns and beams severed one from another. Well, what could cause that? Well, let's look for witnesses that heard things like Daryl, a medical student. We were watching the building actually because it was on fire. The bottom floors of the building were on fire and, you know, we heard this sound that sounded

[00:24:29] like a clap of thunder. Turned around, we were shocked to see that the building was, well, it looked like there was a shockwave ripping through the building and the windows all bumped it out and, you know, it was horrifying. Then, you know, about a second later, the bottom floor caved out and the building followed after that and, um... Fascinating. The sound of a clap of thunder? Well, what did this first responder, Kevin McPadden, former Air Force medic, experience?

[00:24:58] You heard explosions, like, ba-boom! It's like a distinct sound. It's not like when the compression, like boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. Like floors that were dropping and collapsing. This was ba-boom! Like you felt a rumble in the ground, like almost like you wanted to grab onto something. That, to me, I knew that was an explosion. There was no doubt in my mind. And this gentleman, Bill Rosati, who heard a saw a flash.

[00:25:26] Well, I was standing like two blocks away and all of a sudden I just seen a big flash and then I seen the building coming down and I just seen people just running everywhere, chaotic-like. And this first responder, Kevin, excuse me, Captain Richard Patterson, FDNY. One-seven let go as well and was a series of concussive explosions. And Patrick Dillon, first responder.

[00:25:51] I remember feeling that, like it was like freight trains underneath the earth, shaking the earth even, shaking me. And that's when we all saw Building 7 crumple in the middle, like way up at the top. It buckles. It buckles and then dropped. Okay. It's getting interesting. How many of those witnesses do you imagine NIST included in their final report where they had many witnesses?

[00:26:21] They claimed to have interviewed 116. Knowing the government? I would say zero. You got it right. Zero. It's incredible. And there were hundreds, mostly associated with the Twin Towers explosions before those towers came down, as we'll see. Well, who knew about this in advance? Chief Nick Viscani did. We're moving the command post over this way. That building's coming down.

[00:26:50] Wait a minute. No steel frame fire protected building has ever come down due to fire. And you're announcing that it's coming down? How do you know? Same here. Chief Nick, Chief Hayden, Pete Hayden, asked an engineer to look at the building and the engineer says, well, if we allow it to burn. No, the fire chief says if we allow it to burn, we anticipate a collapse. And the engineer says he was in his current state. You have about five hours.

[00:27:20] Sure enough, five hours later, the darn thing collapses. That's very psychic of him. Oh, yeah. The psychicity gets even better. Psychicity? Well, take a look at these mysterious construction workers. I like it, too. They're walking away from building seven. They hear an explosion over their shoulder. Look back at the building. And then look straight into this CNN camera saying this.

[00:28:07] What? The building is about to blow up. Flame and debris coming down. How do they know? And what did Patrick Dillon, the first responder, experience resting in building seven? All right. And he pointed to what turned out to be the entrance to building seven's lobby. He said, go in there. Go in there. Go in there. Take a break. Take a break. There's other guys in there like that.

[00:28:36] And that's what I did. I finished coming down off the pile and climbed over the wreckage of Vesey or Vesey and went into those revolving doors and just kind of fell on the floor. There were other guys in there doing the same thing I was just shaking their heads and spitting out poison and trying to get their, you know, get their lungs back together again as I was.

[00:29:01] And I was on the floor on these battalion chiefs come in through the revolving doors. There was three of them that had the white helmets. I didn't get any, any IDs off them. But as soon as they stepped inside, what stepped in behind them were these two people in black with black ski masks on and and Uzis and the Uzis were hanging off their necks.

[00:29:28] And I don't know what they were, who they were, but the battalion chiefs started yelling at us, right, ordering us to get out, get out of the get out of this building, get out of this building. They're going to pull the building, everybody out now. And they ordered us back out. That's pretty interesting. This story gets a lot deeper and a lot darker, as told also by Captain Richard Patterson. So, you and I made our way over to the entrance of the building.

[00:29:57] Before we arrived there, there was a construction worker who happened to be, he emerged from the dust cloud, then walked past the chief and I. And he said, he had overheard the chief's comment. Then he paused and said, that'll be coming down around five o'clock.

[00:30:22] We'd part ways, we arrived at seven and there were two paramilitarly clad men with black rifles, sunglasses. And as we approached the entrance, they closed ranks and said, one of them said, this building has been secured.

[00:30:45] Which is odd because in my experience in the FDNY, anybody preventing access to the fire department in the event of a fire, that's a criminal act. The chief and I were not in a position to argue the point, given the inequality and weaponry present. He didn't have his axe with him. So this is really fascinating stuff.

[00:31:12] And obviously somebody needs to get to the bottom of who these paramilitary people are. But we also have Kevin McPadden, who earlier was a witness to explosions here. He's telling us the backstory. He's listening to what he believes is a Red Cross worker with a radio in his hand. And this is what he hears. At the last few seconds, he took his hand off. He heard three, two, one. What?

[00:31:41] Do buildings come down due to countdowns by fire? What's really going on here? The BBC announces it 20 minutes before it happened. Very interesting. Now, more on the latest building collapse in New York. You might have heard a few moments ago, I was talking about the Salomon Brothers building collapsing. And indeed it has. Apparently that's- Looks like Google's doing what Google does, censoring videos. Ah, it's a bust. Yeah, right.

[00:32:10] It was not a result of a new attack. It was because the building had been weakened during this morning's attacks. We'll probably find out more now about that from our correspondent, Jane Stanley. Jane, what more can you tell us about the Salomon Brothers building and its collapse? Well, only really what you already know. Details are very, very sketchy. Sketchy indeed. The building hasn't even collapsed yet. What does she know?

[00:32:39] They apologize for this grievous error, citing the confusing events of the day. What does, again, does that make them psychic? Yeah, the psychic-ness and of course using the word confusion is always interesting. We've seen a lot of that. When you were doing the interviews, I just got to ask this, Richard. I didn't mean to interrupt your flow, but did you find any reluctance in any of the people you were interviewing? Had any of them felt like they were kind of being suppressed in their own right about they were trying to get their stories out?

[00:33:06] They'd called the FBI or other agencies and they didn't, you know, there was no interest in having them interviewed by any of the agencies. Did you hear any stories like that? No. Are you referring to the experts that I interviewed? I interviewed 40 of them for the film 9-11 Explosive Evidence. Experts speak out. Gotcha. Okay. Fair enough. And at 1107 that morning, they announced it again prematurely.

[00:33:32] In New York, Alan Dodds-Frank joins us on the phone in Lower Manhattan. Alan? Alan, just two or three minutes ago there was yet another collapse or explosion. I'm now out of sight. Good Samaritan has taken me in on Dwayne Street. But at a quarter to 11, there was another collapse or explosion following the 1030 collapse of the second tower. And a firefighter rushed by it estimated that 50 stories went down. The seat filled with smoke.

[00:34:02] It was like a fire, a forest fire, roaring down a canyon. Guess what? No other building was destroyed besides the Twin Towers until 520 that night. The question is then, was it supposed to go down at that time, a 1045? If it did, we wouldn't have any videos of it because the entire lower Manhattan was filled with these incredible dust clouds when the Twin Towers were destroyed.

[00:34:35] So, some researchers believe that those mysterious construction workers were going back into the building to fix a dud, which was supposed to go off at 1045. And which is why the firefighter would have had that story. Very interesting. Even so, Larry Silverstein, the developer of World Trade Center 7, is being interviewed here on PBS.

[00:35:01] And a year later, this is what he says about destruction of Building 7. I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me that they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire. I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life. And the smartest thing to do is pull it. And they made that decision to pull. Then we watched the building collapse. He made the decision to pull. Firefighters don't make those decisions, by the way.

[00:35:30] They put fires out. They don't destroy buildings. We're going to wrap that one quick segment of it. We're just going to take a commercial break. So, finish up whatever you have to say on this. And then we'll be back. Sure. You bet. So, they weren't even allowed in the building to fight the fire. So, they couldn't have pulled them out, according to NIST and FEMA. So, when we come back, we'll be looking at what do the experts say? What do the experts say? Big MIG subscribers. Big MIG Mafia.

[00:36:00] Don't you guys go anywhere. We'll be right back. Obviously, these details are items you do not want to miss. Stay tuned. 9-11 exposed. Something truly remarkable is happening in the world of cancer care, just south of the U.S. border.

[00:36:30] Since 1963, Oasis of Hope Hospital in Tijuana has been quietly redefining what is possible for patients facing late-stage cancer. Their integrative approach, treating the body, mind, and spirit has produced survival outcomes that far exceed standard American hospital averages. In some cases, more than three times higher. The pattern is clear. Patients at Oasis of Hope often live longer than expected.

[00:36:56] At the center of this extraordinary story is Dr. Francisco Contreras, world-renowned oncologist, author of 15 books, and medical director leading a compassionate team dedicated to giving patients not just treatment, but hope. If you or someone you love is facing cancer, Oasis of Hope offers free Zoom consultations for anyone who mentions the Big MIG show. You have nothing to lose by exploring your options.

[00:37:23] Visit www.oasisophope.com right now. Forged through rigorous training and honed by the finest instructors on earth. These canine units serve beside our nation's warriors as they fight to preserve what we cherish.

[00:37:45] When these warriors complete their duty, the Warrior Dog Foundation provides them with a home deserving of the service they've given us all. At our state-of-the-art kennels, they receive rehabilitation and care suitable for heroes, because that's what they are. Be a part of giving them a future today. Visit www.warriordogfoundation.org

[00:38:09] This is the STAB Sawman Tactical Advantage Blade. Built by former Marine and Navy SEAL Craig Sawman Sawyer. In the teams, every ounce had to earn its place. No extras, no excuses. That is why he built the STAB. 17 practical tools. No moving parts to fail. CPM D2 Tool Steel. Hardened to 60 Rockwell.

[00:38:38] Tungsten carbide glass punch on the pommel. It clips on a belt. It mounts on a plate carrier. Reverse grip or conventional. It stays cooked. Built for the work. Rain, night, salt, mud. Created for adverse conditions. The one he carries now. Grab yours at sawmantacticalblades.com

[00:39:25] Welcome back to the Big MIG Show. Here we are your host, George Ballantine, Lance Migliaccio and our guest, Richard Gage. The professional, the architect, the engineer, the man that knows it all. But, I'm going to say this. If you apply some common sense and a little effort into doing some research, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see there's explosions going on in that building. The wall section, which is connected one column to another by only four 5 eighths inch bolts.

[00:39:54] So, it's not breaking steel. It's punching in individual sections, which is what you see in the analysis of the damage to the structure itself. I just want to show this to our guests because I don't know if they're already. So, I was just showing everybody the plane going in but no debris coming out while it's hitting it, which is kind of weird. So, are you saying there wouldn't be debris coming out right at that? I don't know what would or wouldn't happen.

[00:40:19] I'm just showing you what the damage reveals to us in the analysis of the wall after the plane hit it. Ah. Gotcha. Let me ask you this, Richard, because there's lots of speculation. I've never bought into this part, but there's lots of speculation that some of the plane videos have been altered. Do you have any theory on that or any kind of input on that? I don't buy into it. I think the planes actually hit the building. I think that's genuine.

[00:40:44] Well, I've seen videos of altered or what look like altered videos, but there's 43 individual videos showing the South Tower being hit by the plane. They're not all altered. In fact, almost all of them are not altered. Gotcha. I thought the same thing. Go ahead, George. George. I don't.

[00:41:07] So this is like very personal to me because my cousin was on the top floor working for Cantor Fitzgerald and he perished when the plane hit. So. Oh dear. So I'd like to hold these scumbags accountable. Yeah. Yeah. Well, we can do that. We got to get the information out here first though. So we can't do my family. Thank you. Yeah. Here we go. Let's go. That PDF rocking. Yes. We were going to, we got to ask ourselves, what are the experts say?

[00:41:35] Besides let's get accountability and justice for the family members of the victims who died. Danny Jochenko is one of the top European controlled demolition companies. Danny Jochenko is the expert on this in Europe. What did he say? This is controlled demolition. Certainly. Certainly. There is a task. There is an action.

[00:42:04] It has been a team from experts. Okay. That's very helpful. Thank you, Danny. And there are three dozen structural engineers signed on to the petition demanding a new investigation into the destruction of these towers. What does Kamal Obeid say? A localized failure in a steel frame building like WTC 7 cannot cause a catastrophic collapse

[00:42:29] like a house of cards without a simultaneous and patterned loss of several of its columns at key locations within the building. He says, I like something fire can do. Yeah. Yeah. Not a lot of wiggle room in that statement. No, it's very precise. Yeah. In fact, all of them are. I, you know, we only have an hour or so together today. Our webinar on this subject is two hours long and it contains a lot of great information.

[00:42:57] The University of Alaska got real curious and signed up to study. This is one of the top forensic structural engineers in the country, Professor Leroy Halsey, University of Alaska Fairbanks. He and his PhD candidate students used two separate programs to compete against each other to corroborate each other's results. And they did. What did they find? What did they find in all of this?

[00:43:25] That, their computer model on the left, they couldn't get it to fail. So finally they took out all the columns in the building. And sure enough, it looks exactly like the video of the building's collapse in the center. Whereas the U.S. government, NIST, their computer model crumples up like a beer can and begins to tip over. They can't even mimic in the lab with cooked results. The actual.

[00:43:53] So they stop it after two seconds. They won't. They won't show it to us. So, so this is a 135 page report on this that we've sent to every congressman in every university with structural. And it's like crickets. It's fascinating. What did they conclude? Fire did not cause the collapse of building seven. The temperature was not hot enough to cause the weakening of the steel framing.

[00:44:21] The thermal expansion did not result in a loss of support for the beams and the girders. And the building didn't experience a progressive collapse as claimed by NIST, but a global collapse caused by the near simultaneous failure of all of its columns. Well, what can do that? He doesn't speculate. But we know. So we have to find out, you know, what can do that? Is there evidence of extreme heat?

[00:44:50] Like thermite, for instance. Well, what is thermite? An incendiary used by the military, thermite is a compound of iron oxide and aluminum, which when ignited, sustains an extreme heat reaction, creating molten iron. In just two seconds, thermite can reach temperatures over 4500 degrees Fahrenheit. Quite enough to liquefy steel. Okay, this is very helpful.

[00:45:19] We might be getting somewhere here because that's exactly what we have. A liquefied steel documented by who? FEMA. Before NIST took over the investigation in 2002 and produced their own report, throwing out all this evidence included in Appendix C in the Building Performance Assessment Team report in May of 2002. What did they find? What did they find? Never before observed. Eutectic reactions. Intergranular melting.

[00:45:48] Capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese. Like this piece of World Trade Center 7 steel that they found and that they documented. Rapid oxidation. Sulfidation. Liquid iron. That's molten iron, by the way. That's 3000 degrees Fahrenheit minimum. So, office fires are only about 500 or 600 degrees.

[00:46:13] Where do they come up with the temperatures needed to melt steel? Sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel. They don't know where the sulfur came from either. Perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation says the New York Times, but ignored completely by NIST, omitted from their report. Nobody even speculates on the presence of sulfur.

[00:46:43] Actually, NIST did. They said it came from the gypsum board. Well, gypsum has been used to protect steel for 100 years. It's never turned around and attacked the steel that it's designed to protect. The author of the FEMA report, Jonathan Barnett, fire protection engineering professor, says steel members in the debris pile appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures.

[00:47:10] That takes 4,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Where are these temperatures coming from? So, the structural engineer who was tasked with studying the steel by a National Science Foundation grant, Abulhazan Astani Ozil, says, I saw melting of girders at the World Trade Center. Well, wait. Do you know what can melt girders? We're talking 3,000 degrees.

[00:47:37] Office fires are only five or 600 degrees, maybe 1,000 degrees in the worst of them. Certainly not these office fires that we've been looking at. Here we have real heat, real temperature pouring out of the material held in the jaws of the crab claw excavator. We can tell by the color of that molten material what its temperature is. It is 2,500 degrees plus.

[00:48:06] So, where are these temperatures coming from? Nothing in the official narrative. Not even jet fuel can account for these temperatures. ME Petroleum, who makes the jet fuel, says it only burns 500, 600 degrees in open air. Well, we're talking four, five, six times these temperatures.

[00:48:29] Okay, so that's really important stuff, as is the evidence of ignited incendiaries also found in the World Trade Center dust. The U.S. Geological Survey does all of these studies, hundreds of them, dust samples. And the Particle Atlas of the World Trade Center dust was published in 2005. What did they find? Billions of what? Previously molten iron microspheres.

[00:48:59] Wait a minute. Previously molten, that's 3,000 degrees to melt steel. Iron, we haven't used iron in our skyscrapers for 100 years. This is elemental iron, not melted steel. And spherical. How do they get spherical? Come back to that. So, up to 6% of these samples are previously molten iron microspheres.

[00:49:26] That's four tons of material by extrapolation. The EPA says, I don't know what this stuff is, but it's used to distinct as a signature component. In other words, it's not even office dust, World Trade Center office dust, unless it has all these previously molten iron microspheres in it. I'm fascinated.

[00:49:51] Well, the R.J. Lee group, an environmental concern, also doing studies on the dust, said these are formed during the event. Not before, by the welders putting the building together. Not afterward, by the iron workers taking it apart. But during the event, it gets more and more interesting. Well, where did it come from? Experiment is the arbiter of competing hypotheses.

[00:50:19] Let's do an experiment with thermite. Boom. And it looks like thousands of sparks, but they cool and fall into the pan as molten iron microspheres. So we know exactly where they come from. They come from thermite. Why are they round, circular? That's because of surface tension.

[00:50:44] Isolated particles in liquid form form themselves into the spheres. And they cool and they fall around the World Trade Center. Could that be what's responsible for the toasting of the tops of these carbs? What else could it be? And there's nothing in the official account that can account for it. There's, there's, this is a very high heat event.

[00:51:12] And this is the logical answer given that there's four tons of this material all around lower Manhattan. Well, is there any evidence of unignited thermite? Because all of that was clearly evidence of ignited thermite.

[00:51:31] Well, a team of eight international scientists led by Niels Herrit in Copenhagen independently, or sent independently, independently collected samples of the, of the dust. So they had seven samples. And by, they ended up having time to do four samples and they said, Oh my gosh, this looks like paint chips.

[00:51:58] They're dual layered red gray chips, but they're attracted unlike paint chips to a magnet. So what is that? What does that mean? They have a high, super high iron content, which is the main ingredient of thermite. So they get real curious and they do x-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy. And they find what? Iron and aluminum, the key ingredients of thermite.

[00:52:27] What's that doing? And all the World Trade Center does samples. They get real curious. Now they zoom in 50,000 times to the red layer and they find rhomboidal shaped iron oxide crystals and aluminum platelets that are a thousand times smaller than the diameter of human hair. This is nanotechnology. They're set in a matrix of oxygen, silica, carbon.

[00:52:56] This is incredible. What is the ingredients of thermite being doing in this situation? This is organic material is, by the way, what they put in TNT to make it explosive because those gases ignite, expand rapidly and knock things over, which is how explosives work.

[00:53:19] But incendiaries work by means of a massive heat, 4,000 degree temperatures, which of course destroys steel. So we have an incendiary that's been engineered to become more explosive. It's called super thermite. It was developed prior to 9-11 by the Lawrence Livermore lab. Explosive composites based on thermite reactions at the nanometer scale.

[00:53:48] Because when you get these particles so small, the surface volume increases exponentially. And you've engineered an incendiary to become more explosive. In fact, the peer-reviewed literature shows that when they put these in a heater, differential scanning calorimeter, they ignite at about 800 degrees Fahrenheit.

[00:54:17] Well, that's exactly what the four samples from the World Trade, studying the World Trade Center dust did. They all ignited. Paint doesn't do this, by the way. Yeah, it's not known to be explosive or incendiary at 4,000 degrees. Producing 4,000, yeah. Exactly. So what happens, do you think, though, when they ignite? What do they produce?

[00:54:45] Molten iron microspheres. They're found in the U.S. Geological Survey. As if we didn't know where those molten iron microspheres all came from. They're found attached to partially ignited red-grade chips, as you see here and here. So it's not that much of a mystery.

[00:55:13] It's a super advanced way to do business. This is not made in a cave in Afghanistan. It's made only in the most sophisticated advanced defense contracting laboratories. So we can get a real investigation to study where this came from. We just haven't been able to do it yet. But the team of scientists published all this in the Bentham Open Chemical Physics Journal in 2009. What did they find?

[00:55:43] The red layer is active, unreacted, thermitic material incorporating nanotechnology. It's a highly energetic, pyrotechnic or explosive material. We had this for over a decade. We've given it to every congressman and senator. And we've given it personally. And we've provided it to academics all over the country and to the media. Let me stop you that for a minute.

[00:56:13] So you're saying every member of Congress on both sides of the aisle has gotten a copy of this at one time or the other? 435 of them. At least twice. How many of them actually got back to you to go over the material? One. That was Jim Hines. Jim Hines. He reviewed it in his office. We reviewed it in his office with him from Connecticut. And he said, I'm going to write a letter to NIST. And he did. And NIST wrote back, don't worry about it.

[00:56:41] There's aluminum cladding in the building and there's steel in the building which rusts. And those are the two main ingredients. And they just somehow mixed together. On the way down. So hold on a minute just for the audience. So 434 other members of Congress. That's our executive branch guys didn't respond or didn't ask any questions or didn't email you back. We're investigating this. We're looking into it.

[00:57:10] We're going to talk to the Department of Homeland Security. You heard nothing from the 434 others. Correct. Absolutely nothing. And this is exactly my point. When it comes down to, you know, George and I don't believe there's more than 15 or 20 honest men and women there. And I'm not even sure there's that many. The truth is, when you have evidence like this, you think this would trigger a real investigation. But instead, what do we get? We get crickets. Go ahead. I didn't mean to stop you there, Richard.

[00:57:36] And we also gave him our petition with 3,600 architects and engineers signed on. We gave him the DVD of the 9-11 Explosive Evidence Experts Speak Out, a documentary with 40 high rise architects, structural engineers, metallurgists, chemists, physicists, controlled demolition experts, all laying out the evidence. And yes, crickets. And the evidence is clearly indicative of controlled demolition.

[00:58:04] Not one of these characteristics can be accomplished by fires, let alone all of them. With additional circumstantial corroborative evidence and testimony, this is found to be proof of controlled demolition, a body of proof that's convinced 3,600 of them demanding a new investigation.

[00:58:26] And that's, many of them appear in the forthcoming film, which we are trying desperately to get produced and edited right now. We have made, we have filmed it. We're now in editing. And we need to support our editor with, because he's a volunteer and he has to take paid jobs. So we need to pay him.

[00:58:50] So we're asking people to help co-produce the film, which Mick Harrison, the litigation director for the Lawyers Committee for 9-11 Inquiry and I are featured in. I'm presenting this evidence and he explains it to the grand jury, because this film is made in the context of a testimony to a grand jury.

[00:59:11] And it will be given to the real grand jury when we, and we're trying desperately through legal measures to get it in front of. So that's an opportunity for everybody to help co-produce the film. And, because we've been looking at the evidence for Building 7, but when we peer into the future here, the immediate future for us on this program, and think about the Twin Towers.

[00:59:39] Because if Building 7 was controlled demolition, it's part of the same set of events. There's a conspiracy there to blow up that building quite illegally. And there are witnesses of explosives in that building, many more than I showed you. Then we have to ask ourselves, is that possible at the Twin Towers?

[01:00:00] And just looking at these side by side, as if they were happening at once, building destructions. You can see the upward, outward arching streamers, the geometry of fireworks, freely flying structural steel sections, ejected laterally at 600 feet away from the building, trailed by thick white smoke clouds.

[01:00:28] Well, now we know where those thick white smoke clouds came from. Because the other byproduct of thermite is aluminum oxide ash. And that is what we're seeing trailing these structural steel sections so far. And so it all begins to come together when you connect the dots and let's do that. The features of a controlled demolition in the Twin Towers, starting with number one, is there a sudden onset of destruction?

[01:00:58] Well, sure enough, the building is standing still and all of a sudden it's in uniform downward motion. No halt, no hesitation when there's a collision with the cold, hard steel below. Same at the South Tower. It's still and all of a sudden it's in uniform downward motion. What happened to the structure to allow that?

[01:01:23] Well, this theory is that the upper part above the point of plane impacts drove the rest of the building down to the ground and then crushed itself. They call it the crush down, crush up theory. And it suffers from a key problem, i.e. Newton's third law of motion. We'll come to that. But this is put together by Zdenik Bazant from Chicago, from Northwestern Chicago, from Northwestern University in Chicago.

[01:01:53] And he submitted this highly complex paper just two days after 9-11. Sure, the rest of us were in shock trying to figure out when the next plane was coming, who did this to us, or how these buildings collapsed. And this guy has the theory all submitted to a peer reviewed paper within that timeframe. And it remains extremely quick writing. My hat's off to him.

[01:02:22] Then he was able to do something this complex that quickly. No predictive, no pre-preparation for this document. No, none at all. This is not suspicious at all. In fact, you know, and sarcastically speaking, but it remains the key theoretical basis used by NIST to support their renamed column failure. NIST probably paid to reproduce it, so of course they support the theory.

[01:02:52] That's an excellent speculation. Another quick question. I don't know if you have pictures where it shows the beams are cut on like an angle, diagonal. Yes. Yes, that's a complex discussion because many of those diagonals were cut by ironworkers in the field, and there's evidence for that, so I've taken it out of the presentation. There are others, I believe, that were not cut by ironworkers, but it's not worth the debate. Gotcha. Ah. Yeah.

[01:03:22] Very important though. Interesting argument though. Yeah. Which is indicative of controlled demolition because they use angled cuts on these steel columns. But what does Newton's Third Law of Motion tell us? There's an equal and opposite destructive force when two bodies collide, like a Volkswagen and a Mack truck.

[01:03:47] Does it matter if we drop the Volkswagen onto the Mack truck, oriented vertically? No. The lightest part of a structure cannot possibly destroy the cold, hard, heavier, intact steel below, which is getting heavier and heavier and heavier and heavier and heavier as we go down.

[01:04:05] So, mid height, 36 inches by 22 inches, excuse me, by 16 inches by 2 inches thick, and they get heavier and heavier and heavier still, till at the bottom they're almost solid steel, 52 inches by 22 inches. So, the, that's not what's happening though. They're not being crushed at all. You can see it right here. Look yourself. You can see the top part is telescoping in on itself.

[01:04:34] Let me make it easier. Watch the bottom red line. Point of plane impacts. It doesn't move down until after two or three seconds. The top part is destroying itself. The question is, what's destroying it? Because it's the same thing that destroys the bottom part. In fact, if the top part was there, we'd see it.

[01:04:59] But none of the photos, none of the videos show a top part that's riding the rest of the building down to the ground. This is simply theory, completely unsubstantiated theory. What we do see is, again, upward, outward arching streamers, a geometry of fireworks, freely flying solid objects, four and eight ton structural steel sections trailed by these aluminum oxide ash.

[01:05:30] It's incredible. And if it were there, by the way, it would have destroyed these few remaining dozen or so core columns in the tower, the north tower here, which have survived the explosions going on around them. The top part would have crushed all of this. So this is completely ignored in Byzant's top down theory.

[01:06:00] This is what the real theory is, an explosion out away from those columns and not quite destroying those columns to the chagrin of those who set this up. And it's been all covered up by the NIST report, which was tasked by Congress to explain how and why these three buildings collapsed. But in $20 million and 10,000 pages, they did neither. It's a complete obfuscation.

[01:06:29] So we have to look and see what really could have destroyed these towers. Well, let's turn to the oral histories of the first responders. The real witnesses that were interviewed by Thomas von Essen and that were produced 12,000. He's a fire commissioner. Produced 12,000 pages of testimony read by Professor Graham McQueen.

[01:06:56] He found now 186 of these first responders were witnesses of explosions. Let's take a look. We felt the ground shake. We could see the towers sway and then it just came down.

[01:07:11] Now, again and again, we're going to hear this specific order of events from these professional expert witnesses about them hearing explosions, seeing explosions, feeling explosions before the tower came down. All of a sudden, the ground just started shaking, felt like a train running under my feet. The next thing we know, we look up and the tower is collapsing. It shook my bones.

[01:07:39] Shortly before the first tower came down, I remember feeling the ground shaking. I heard a terrible noise. I heard a terrible noise and then debris just started flying everywhere. I saw flash, flash, flash at the lower level of the building. You know, like when they demolish a building. With each popping sound initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building. Then it would just go all the way around the building on both sides. I saw a number of brief light sources being emitted from inside the building between floors 10 and 15.

[01:08:08] He saw about six of these brief flashes accompanied by a crackling sound before the tower collapsed. I saw low level flashes. I saw flash, flash, flash. Then it looked like the building came down. You ever see a professional demolition where they set chargers on certain floors and you hear a pop, pop, pop. I heard that friggin noise. That's when I saw the building coming down. An explosion appeared at the very top simultaneously from all four sides.

[01:08:38] The material shot out horizontally and then there seemed to be a momentary delay before you could see the beginning of the collapse. How specific do these witnesses need to be to paint the picture of what really happened there? There was an explosion in the south tower, one floor under another when it hit about the fifth floor. I figured it was a bomb because it looked like a synchronized, deliberate kind of thing.

[01:09:07] It seemed like on television when they blow up these buildings, it seemed like I was going all the way around like a belt. All these explosions. The building was blowing out on all four sides. We actually heard the pops, you know? You heard the pops of the building. I thought the terrorist planted explosives somewhere in the building. That's how loud it was. A crackling explosive. Another loud boom at the upper floors and then a series of smaller explosions, which appeared to go around the, completely around the building at the upper floors.

[01:09:35] And another loud earth shattering blast with a large fireball that blew out more debris. The lower level of the building. You know, like when they demolish a building. That's what I thought I saw. Did you see any flashes? He said, yeah, I thought it was just me. He said, no, I saw them too. Everybody, I think at that point still thought these buildings were blown up. So I was fully expecting anything else to blow up. You were there when the planes hit? I said, no, I was there when the building exploded.

[01:10:05] Oh, you mean when it fell down. No. When it exploded. Dumbass. Yeah. You don't need these witnesses. On the fly editing. Yeah. Is there a straight down symmetrical progression? Another feature of controlled demolition. Well, actually the South tower begins to tip over. In fact, it's tipping at 22 degrees. And so we have asymmetrical loading from this part of the building.

[01:10:33] We have asymmetrical damage from the fires and the plane impacts. How in the world then do we get complete symmetrical damage? Just like the firefighters said, all the way around the building, like a belt. All these explosions. All the way down the building. It makes no sense. It's a complete non sequitur. Let's zoom into the leading corner of these explosions and ask ourselves, what are we looking at?

[01:11:07] I see 12 independent explosions. This is not a big nuclear bomb going off. Like has been hypothesized by some. This is not directed energy weapons, which has been hypothesized by others. These are independently pre-placed in this outer core. Excuse me. The outer structural steel columns.

[01:11:37] Every third floor or so. We don't really know. It's amazing. Very clear. Feature number four. Are there isolated explosive ejections called squibs in the controlled demolition industry? Well, here's one. 20 stories below. There's one. 40 stories below the zone of destruction. And we even have these squibs. 60 stories down below. There's no accounting.

[01:12:07] And that for this in the initial narrative whatsoever. They just don't show it on mainstream media. Nor this one. This looped video of the South Tower, which begins to tip to the right, even as the and because of these independent explosions seen jetting out the left side all at once.

[01:12:33] So it's destroying the structural integrity of the steel frame so that it can't actually act as a rigid body and fall off the body below. But settles back in on itself down to the footprint of the building because it's essentially a liquid at that point. How fast is the building coming down?

[01:12:56] Well, once again, physics teacher David Chandler does an analysis and he finds it's coming down almost at free fall acceleration. It's accelerating. Meaning what? It's getting faster and faster every second. It's two thirds of free fall acceleration. In fact, what does that mean? That 90% of the structure has been removed.

[01:13:23] That's you can actually calculate that this structure, by the way, more steel than glass on the facade of this building. And how does that happen? That it's just been 90% of it's been removed. This is an enormously strong building with 47 massive core columns and 240 perimeter columns.

[01:13:51] Okay, let's see what happened to him as we look at the lateral ejection. Because skyscrapers all around the towers have embedded in them four and eight ton structural steel sections that have been laterally discharged 600 feet in every direction. Trailed by thick white smoke clouds, as we saw, destroying the winter gardens at the World Financial Center 600 feet away.

[01:14:20] And again, trailed by what can only be aluminum oxide ash. But they're freely flying. They're completely... Well, look, look here back out. And then 45 degrees as gravity begins to take over. So how does pancaking collapses work? Down. What's going on here? Out. Back to forward two.

[01:14:48] There's enough energy here to hurl a 200 pound cannonball three miles. This is an extraordinary amount of energy and gravity alone can't possibly account for it. You have a 1200 foot wide debris radius. The building's only 200 feet or so wide. It makes no sense if you're looking at a pancaking collapse.

[01:15:14] The debris is well outside the boundaries of the World Trade Center, even impacting building seven, as you see, to the north. So, hey, but I got a question for you guys. If... Please. A hundred thousand tons of steel framing is distributed outside the footprint of the building. And see what's left there. What's crushing the building?

[01:15:44] This is more than half the weight of the building. Three quarters of the weight of the building, probably. Yeah. It's not available. Yes. It doesn't make any sense. Of course, when you start cutting steel columns, it's more sophisticated. But like, debt cord is one of the things you would use for structural to cut columns evenly and obviously thermites melting. I mean, there's no doubt that none of this makes any sense because those planes didn't hold enough jet fuel, even if jet fuel burned at a higher temperature.

[01:16:14] And there was nothing inside the building to trigger incendiary temperatures that were this high. None of it makes any sense if you don't look at some sort of outside influence that was put inside the building. Yeah. You have to. And so let's look at the concrete and see if it was available to crush the building. Because we have 110 floors, each four and eight inches thick, each an acre in size. Let's look for them.

[01:16:42] They're built with poured concrete on metal decking over lightweight steel trusses. And so do we find them? No. We see a miscellaneous pile of steel there. Maybe three, four stories tall, maybe five. And what we're really looking for is this. 110 pancakes, right? Certainly damaged, but completely missing. I mean, we don't find 50 of them.

[01:17:12] We don't find 20 of them. We don't find one of them. This is bizarre. And the mist covered none of this. Yeah. If a few of the top floors gave way, would that be enough weight to even cause the other floors to go? No, we saw that there was no slowing down. They built the structure below it, arrested it. Yes.

[01:17:40] There was a lot of weight up there, but guess what? Through. It wasn't. It was destroyed and distributed laterally as we saw. 600 feet in every direction. One of the theories out there, Richard, that people have tried to propel, and I'm sure it's obviously people that don't want the real story to come out. It's the water weight as the sprinklers went off and that additional water weight caused that even collapse, which nobody's buying it, but that seems to be one of the stories. Had you ever heard that story before?

[01:18:10] No, I haven't actually, but the floors are level. Yeah. The water would leak, not leak, it would run off each floor until A, B, the sprinklers were sabotaged with explosions in the basement witnessed by Willie Rodriguez and many others who were in the basement. I didn't know about that. Massive explosions. I didn't know about that. So I don't know how well the sprinklers work, but that's the theory. Gotcha.

[01:18:40] Is that the sprinklers were sabotaged. So we got to look for this concrete and lo and behold, it's pulverized in midair. So all the photos and all the videos show exactly that.

[01:18:58] The pulverization of 90,000 tons, almost the rest of the weight of the building, by the way, of concrete to 100 micron particles distributed throughout lower Manhattan in a blanket three inches thick. Well, wait a minute. If all the concrete is distributed from river to river in a three square mile area, what's crushing the building?

[01:19:26] It wasn't the steel and it's not the concrete. This is more than seven eighths the weight of the building. And it's not available to crush the building. And guess what? All of that weight was included in Zdenk-Bazan's theory to crush the building.

[01:19:49] But most all of it was not there because so in an addition to that, he had to double the math. It took 10. It took engineers 10 years to decode this four page paper, by the way. It's extraordinary. He had to double the mass up above. That's fraudulent. So he took the mass and he doubled it.

[01:20:16] And he decreased the column strength below by a factor of three. So he rigged the whole system, 12 to one in favor of a collapse. It's complete fraud submitted to the Journal of Engineering Mechanics run by the American Society of Civil Engineers. Did he retire to a tropical island somewhere internationally right after this paper came out? I'm curious. I hope so. I don't know.

[01:20:45] But the engineers have sued the American Society of Civil Engineers because they wouldn't publish their paper refuting the paper of Zdenk-Bazan. What was their excuse for not publishing it in the same journal that the original was published in? Out of scope. Wait a minute. How can it be out of scope to publish a challenge to somebody else's previously published peer reviewed paper? That's the purpose of peer reviewed papers.

[01:21:13] So this is complete fraud on the part of the American Society of Civil Engineers. Well, we have to ask the question. How could they have gotten into this building to set these charges? Interestingly, there were fireproofing upgrades on the floors that were hit by the airplanes. Is that just a coincidence? I don't know. There is liquid applied fireproofing. It's called intermescent paint.

[01:21:42] Could they have been under a black operation applying thermite to the steel and the bottom of the decking? Don't know. But it needs to be investigated. Who could have done this?

[01:21:57] Maybe the individuals posing as elevator mechanics, who were in fact, because if they had access to the elevators, they had access to the core columns and beams in the building by cutting out the gypsum board between the two. So.

[01:22:22] In fact, there was an elevator modernization, the largest one in history going on the nine months prior to 9-11. It was performed by Ace Elevator. Ace Elevator came out of nowhere to get this contract from Otis Elevator, who had installed and had been maintaining these elevators up to up to the point Ace Elevator took over this contract.

[01:22:52] Is that company? Do we know if they're still in existence? They went bankrupt immediately after 9-11. Oh, interesting. Surprised they didn't call it Acme Elevator. That would have been just as innocuous. They could have blamed the roadrunner, the Coyote. Yeah, it's at the end of the day, that is obviously interesting. I wonder if those people retired on the same island and they're living in luxury driving Rolls Royces. Go ahead, Richard. Could be.

[01:23:20] We certainly want an investigation of Ace Elevator. Also, and the company who did the fireproofing upgrade. And also, in fact, the security company, Securicom Stratosec, who had the security contract which ended the day of 9-11. So, that's quite an interesting coincidence there as well.

[01:23:46] We have two important Bush family members on the board of directors of those two companies, Wirt Walker III and Marvin Bush. Oh, back to the elevators. There was a labor dispute that day, so the mechanics couldn't make it to the job on 9-11. 50 of them were pulled out to a union maiden to discuss some business. Wow. Just a coincidence. Nothing suspicious there at all.

[01:24:15] No, no, we got to get to the bottom of this. And in fact, what happened to the steel? Easily the largest and most perplexing structural failures in history. We have 400 truckloads a day lined up just two weeks after 9-11 to cart this steel away. This is the forensic evidence that was shipped to China for recycling before investigators could get their hands on it and do a proper investigation.

[01:24:45] This is the illegal destruction of evidence in a crime scene. Yeah. I know when you're about to talk, Lance. I have a question. You know, I'm hard to choke because at the end of the day, you know, nothing like destroying the evidence. You send it to China, they become complicit.

[01:25:04] And the fact that they were able to line up that many trucks, even the truck, the material out that quickly, if anybody knows anything about construction, trying to get contracts completed, this would normally not be a no bid contract. You'd have multiple people bidding for this opportunity because salvage is a big business. That would never happen that quickly unless it was set up in advance. Yeah. Go ahead, George. So one of our listeners in the chat wants me to ask you this question.

[01:25:31] What is the effect of compressing 523,000 cubic feet of air when a one acre slab of concrete eight inches thick drops at 32, I guess, feet per second? I don't know. I mean, I don't know either. No, no, that's why I'm asking you. They asked me to ask you. I don't know what he's getting at.

[01:25:55] The compression of air can, you know, it would be swooshed out the side, certainly. But it wouldn't be explosive. I mean, wouldn't the air push to the weakest point in the building, which would be the glass or the windows? Obviously, it would push to that area first. And if there was a way that it stayed compressed and maybe obviously might have an impact, but it would seem to me the windows would blow out. If you know what?

[01:26:21] I think they're trying to get at maybe that whatever that effect maybe is what pushed all that concrete and stuff out so far wide. Maybe that's what you're trying to get at. I'm not sure, but I'm just that's what I think. Except that what we see is the concrete pulverizing in massive clouds of concrete powder.

[01:26:47] So it's not pushing anything down if it's been blown up like we have shown. Also, we see all of these explosions below the zone of destruction that we discussed 20, 40, 60 stories down. Obviously, nothing's pushing down there. So keep that in mind.

[01:27:04] But all of this prompts Bill Manning, editor in chief of Fire Engineering magazine to cry out crucial evidence that could answer many questions is on the slow boat to China, showing an astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough scientific investigation. The destruction and removal of evidence must stop immediately. But of course, it didn't. And all of this evidence is.

[01:27:33] It amounts to evidence of controlled demolition characteristic and mostly in this case, very uncharacteristic features of controlled demolition out instead of just down. You don't want to do that in the middle of a city with blowing up or taking down your buildings in implosions.

[01:27:54] So fire doesn't account for any of these features, let alone all of them, with additional circumstantial evidence and testimony that we have in our other longer, even longer. What about the gold that was supposedly in the world? Hold on a second. We'll wrap this up. We have proof of controlled demolition.

[01:28:16] Again, a body of proof that's convinced millions around the world to demand a new investigation, including 30,000 years of technical professionals. Again, we're bringing these professionals to the film series, two dozen episodes, and we do need people's help making it to co-produce the film. And we've already made some excellent documentaries, but these weren't designed to bring the evidence to a grand jury.

[01:28:43] 9-11 explosive evidence, the documentary 7 made by Dylan Avery about the Holsey technical documentation, and the 15-minute documentary just on building 7, all available at richardgage911.org, along with the brochure, which is an outline of all the evidence we've been discussing today.

[01:29:09] You can download it for free and print it and hand it out, because we've got to ask ourselves, what's the cost of what happened following 9-11? $6.4 trillion in a global war on terror, 800,000 lives lost in the Middle East, and 7,000 of them are owned U.S. soldiers, 30,000 suicides since.

[01:29:36] It's an incredible cost with our vets, to dwarf the cost, actually, who died in service. It's incredible. Afghanistan war, $14 trillion, the longest war in U.S. history. Who's talking about it? You know, nobody. The post-9-11 war is $8 trillion.

[01:30:00] So, this is a cost that we can't ever hope to make up economically. And the cost to our civil liberties, which through the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, all of this, and the torture policies, which have destroyed our reputation as a country.

[01:30:30] And we do have a cost we can't hope to make up unless we have a complete peaceful revolution in this country and throw out every member of Congress and start over. It's a dark truth about 9-11. Where do we draw our line in the sand? Do we wait for the next 9-11? Well, I have news for you. It's already happened. It's happened over the last three years. We've got to wake up and speak the truth about 9-11.

[01:30:59] It's the 2x4 that woke me up, being hit on the head, speaking of which we have amazing leverage. Just any of us are the small domino here, right? Well, what he tells us is that the Empire State Building, if they had 29 dominoes, the last one would be that high. And we can take out the deep state with such determination.

[01:31:24] If everybody shares this podcast with two other people and ask them to share it with two other people, and they do, we can make a difference, guys. We've got to wake up. That's what we're getting at here, right? And there is no doubt, Richard. I think that's great information. At the end of the day, that is true. It's the education of the people. And we have to disseminate that information. So in that light, we want you to take the short-form, long-form content in this interview and put it out everywhere.

[01:31:52] You can take this interview, and you can email it to all your congressional members and remind them that they already had this information and what the hell are they doing about it. We know right now they're not doing anything. By you sending this to them by email over and over and over and over again, hopefully it will make a difference. There are people that I do trust in D.C. like Corey Mills. Maybe he needs to be reminded. Maybe his own people filtered it. But there's lots of people there that could probably make a difference.

[01:32:21] George, I don't know if there's any questions in the chat we didn't get to. I know a lot of people are probably shocked about some of the information. No, I love your interview. I got a couple questions, but they're all paying attention. I warned them if they didn't pay attention. Yeah. Richard, we're just about out of time for tonight, but can you run back through? Number one, how much are you trying to raise for the documentary? What do you need to get it completed?

[01:32:42] $10,000 is the amount that's needed for the editor so that we can get him working full-time on it. So if everybody donated $100, we'd be there quickly. And where do they need to make that donation? On the website, richardgage911.org. And this is a partnership between the Lawyers Committee for 9-11 Inquiry and Richard Gage 9-11.

[01:33:11] And so the Lawyers Committee is a nonprofit, so they're handling all the funds. Got you. They go straight there. And can you run through your social media or anywhere else where people can find you and where they can obviously keep an eye on what you're doing and what's going on? Yeah. Find us at Twitter, YouTube, Facebook. Richard Gage 9-11. Richard Gage 9-11. Well, I've got to tell you, thanks so much for the interview. I'm sorry we ran out of time. Obviously, really interesting topic.

[01:33:39] I know our listeners and subscribers appreciated it. Hopefully, they'll take that content and share it. Don't forget, please follow Richard. You want to follow G. Balentine, Lance Miliacho, and The Big Mink Show on X. Join our community. We've got a lot of great interviews coming up. That community over on X will give you that information early on. You can find us on all other platforms at George Balentine, Lance Miliacho, and The Big Mink. And, of course, if you're not already subscribed to us on Rumble, please hit that subscribe button.

[01:34:09] Hit the like, follow, comment. And if you can afford a paid subscription, great. If you can tip, that's great. All of it goes right back into the show, production. And if you can afford to support Richard, please do. Go over to the website. Whatever you can do is going to help him get to that $10,000 number. This is the kind of thing that has to be put out en masse to the public. Because let's face it, they did an incredible job of covering this up. That's what they do. That's how they run the narratives.

[01:34:39] They're so good about it. And that whole mainstream media industrial complex, that information comes from reports like you heard about that were falsified, that the details in it were incorrect. And it gets disseminated all across, and that's how people get convinced, oh, no, it was only a terrorist attack. The truth is, if you had suspicions before, hopefully Richard nailed those down. George, any last comments? No, I just want to say thank you to all the listeners and people in the chat that were paying attention.

[01:35:07] They actually all said you did an awesome job there, Richard. Great information. Even Gus paid attention. He doesn't really pay attention well, but he paid attention. He told me. Yeah, he told me. He said it. So we'll see you guys on Friday. Tomorrow night, we're off. I'm off tomorrow night. Friday. That's it. Love you guys. Have a good night.

[01:35:40] Something truly remarkable is happening in the world of cancer care, just south of the U.S. border. Since 1963, Oasis of Hope Hospital in Tijuana has been quietly redefining what is possible for patients facing late-stage cancer. Their integrative approach, treating the body, mind, and spirit, has produced survival outcomes that far exceed standard American hospital averages. In some cases, more than three times higher. The pattern is clear.

[01:36:08] Patients at Oasis of Hope often live longer than expected. At the center of this extraordinary story is Dr. Francisco Contreras, world-renowned oncologist, author of 15 books, and medical director leading a compassionate team dedicated to giving patients not just treatment, but hope. If you or someone you love is facing cancer, Oasis of Hope offers free Zoom consultations for anyone who mentions the Big Mig show. You have nothing to lose by exploring your options.

[01:36:39] Visit www.oasisophope.com right now. Forged through rigorous training and honed by the finest instructors on earth. These canine units serve beside our nation's warriors as they fight to preserve what we cherish. When these warriors complete their duty, the Warrior Dog Foundation provides them with a home deserving of the service they've given us all.

[01:37:09] At our state-of-the-art kennels, they receive rehabilitation and care suitable for heroes. Because that's what they are. Be a part of giving them a future today. Visit www.warriordogfoundation.org. This is the STAB Sawman Tactical Advantage Blade. Built by former Marine and Navy SEAL Craig Sawman Sawyer.

[01:37:37] In the teams, every ounce had to earn its place. No extras, no excuses. That is why he built the stab. 17 practical tools. No moving parts to fail. CPM D2 tool steel. Hardened to 60 Rockwell. Tungsten carbide glass punch on the pommel. It clips on a belt. It mounts on a plate carrier. Reverse grip or conventional. It stays cooked. Built for the work. Rain, night, salt, mud.

[01:38:06] Created for adverse conditions. The one he carries now. Grab yours at sawmantacticalblades.com.