All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 4, 2025 - Jim Fetzer
01:31:36
Richard Gage on 9/11 (2 September 2025)
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
She can't hear you.
You're in my ear.
Oh, Dean, oh, tell him I say hi.
Did you find the DM with the, it's the real Dean.
Please leave your message for.
affair with his guy.
even admitted to the operator that it just was a friend.
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, wherever you find yourself.
This is 9-11 debate night one, night one here of a huge week we have planned for you here at Real Deal Media with some of the legends and the most courageous truth tellers that are speaking truth about that dreadful day in history that we're going to learn a lot of things about.
Now because presentations like these usually in a debate to go with it would take an astronomical amount of time we have decided to divvy it up throughout the week and that's why Richard Gage here is he's here tonight.
And you're going to hear from him in his entire presentation within a very, very abundant amount of time.
Now, you're going to see Jim Fetzer, his opponent, join us here on the stage this coming Thursday.
But ultimately, the big debate night you don't want to miss that you want to mark your calendars for is this coming Saturday.
So you're going to see the presentations and the proof that they have and what they think and their thesis.
And then ultimately Saturday, these two legends will go toe to toe.
And I'll be the moderator slash referee for that.
But let's welcome to the stage a legend himself, the one, the only leader and founder of the Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth, Richard Gage.
Richard, thank you for joining us here tonight.
Thank you, Dean.
Awesome to be here with you.
I'm the former CEO of Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth.
And now Gail and I are on our own.
And we are having a fantastic time reaching the public, millions of people.
It's a very exciting time in the last three years at RichardGage911.org.
And thank you for correcting the matter because, you know, there's so much misinformation all over the place.
And we're going to set the record straight here tonight.
And you can, you know, mark your calendars for Saturday.
And Richard, you know, I'm glad we're doing this because there's a lot.
There's a whole new generation that is learning about that day, you know, two decades ago now.
How important is it that we continue to carry the torch for truth, whether it's in the format of debate or discussion or presentation?
Just how critical is it right now?
And then we'll get started.
We're going to be living in a full-on totalitarian police state if we don't expose the false flag operation known as 9-11.
We're going to be getting many more of them if we don't alert the public to how manipulated we all are, how we're being dragged into wars, particularly in the Middle East and the media drumming up the march to war and our government lying to us about these events like 9-11.
We're going to expose those lies tonight.
Well, isn't that something?
Okay, so let's get started.
I'm going to get out of the way.
And we are broadcasting live now over there on Dean Ryan TV, the incredibly shadow banned YouTube channel over there, as well as we are on the Real Dean Ryan over there on X.
And Richard Gage is sharing our little broadcast here on his big, big stage.
And hello to everybody.
And everybody else there.
Yeah, hello.
Hi, Mom.
And then we're also on Rumble as well.
You don't want to miss that.
Okay, Richard, I'm going to give you the floor and I'm going to probably learn a lot of things here tonight.
Let's get started, shall we?
Yeah, me too.
We got a lot of new information.
In fact, we're all the way off of the screen.
If that's what you want, that's fine.
Sorry, Richard.
I have Tourette's.
I have Tourette's.
It happens.
Okay, so yeah, here it is.
I thought you might want to do it that way, but your choice.
And this takes courage to face these facts because they turn over for me 19 years ago, turn over my world upside down.
And it can do that to you.
So I'm just giving you fair warning.
And tonight, this is part of a debate.
So what I've done is taken my regular 90-minute presentation and inserted responses to the improbability in my mind that there were nuclear weapons involved in the destruction of the towers.
The improbability that no planes hit the towers, meaning I believe planes hit the towers.
We're going to be addressing all of that today, and we're going to squeeze it in.
We're also going to be addressing the directed energy weapons theory promoted by Dr. Judy Wood and others.
And so all of that is going to be the reason we're racing through a very tailored presentation tonight.
But I wanted you to know that we do have this series, 9-11 Crime Scene to Courtroom, that we have 12 episodes.
We've already produced four of them.
They're out.
They're on the website at richardgage911.org, at 911c2c.org.
And I wanted to encourage everybody not only to watch that episode, which you'll learn much more about NIST and their deceptions.
NIST is the National Institute of Standards and Technology, who was tasked by Congress to explain these collapses to the American people, and they lied big time.
We're exposing those lies.
And we're hosting a conference in Washington, D.C., physically.
300 people will be there.
The conference will be led and keynoted by Senator Ron Johnson.
Oh, wow.
Yeah, the chair of this committee on investigations.
He has subpoena power.
He's used it.
And he'll be using it for 9-11.
He's going to be telling us how that's going to be happening.
Very exciting.
John Kiriaku, CIA whistleblower, other whistleblowers from the Veterans of Intelligence VIPS.
I forget what that B stands for.
Anyway, firefighters, family members, architects, engineers, we're all going to be there.
Former Representative Kurt Weldon and Dennis Kucinich are going to be there.
A very exciting time.
And yes, it will be live streamed.
And yes, it will be live streamed on Clayton Morris's redacted platform all three days of this conference, September 10, 11, and 12.
In the evening on September 10 and 11, all day on the Pentagon, September 12, with the experts speaking there.
So learn more at richardgage911.org.
So we're going to dive right into Building 7.
This is the third worst structural failure in modern history, and most architects know nothing about it.
It wasn't hit by a plane.
This would be the tallest buildings in most of our states.
Yet it's dwarfed next to the tallest buildings in the world at the time they were built, the Twin Towers.
So we're talking about about 100, part of the World Trade Center complex, about 100 yards north of the North Tower, this building is, and it did sustain some damage, but that damage was not a significant factor in the building's collapse.
And so what was?
Well, let's look at that collapse.
Most of this smoke is from Building 5, which was a raging fire on the other side of the World Trade Center, Building 7.
And after witnesses here, explosions, it drops straight down all of a sudden, uniformly, symmetrically, into its footprint in under seven seconds.
The East Penn House, as you can see, comes down first, in the upper left, six seconds later.
Again, the whole building drops in the exact manner of a classic controlled demolition.
No difference.
Uh, the official cause of this building's collapse.
What we found was that uncontrolled building fires caused an extraordinary event.
The collapse of Wall Trade Center Seven was primarily due to fire fires.
Okay well, let's look at those fires.
These are those fires.
They are few, they are small and they are scattered throughout the building, and they have never in history brought down a steel frame fire protected structure like much hotter, larger and longer lasting buildings have never, even longer lasting fires in these buildings have never brought down a steel frame fire protected structure, not even after 9-11, where we have these fully engulfed buildings.
So you can see right off the bat that Nist is standing out there naked uh, trying to gaslight.
Uh architects engineers, the entire American public.
Uh, let's see what it might look like if it couldn't have been brought down by fires.
Oh uh yeah, a series of known controlled demolitions on the right, on the left uh, building seven on the right.
So yeah, we've got some problems and we're going to look at the typical features of controlled demolition.
See if building seven has any of these.
Beginning with, is there a sudden onset?
Let's listen to Dan Rather, describe this for us, and what you're seeing are high shots.
Now, here we're going to show you a videotape of the collapse itself.
Describe that.
Now we go to videotape, the collapse of this building.
It's amazing.
Amazing, incredible, pick your word.
For the third time today, it's It's reminiscent of those pictures we've all seen too much on television before when a building was deliberately destroyed, destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock it down.
What was that, dan?
Deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock down.
He's using his intuition.
We have a frame of reference for this type of collapse.
Twin towers are very different, but this is a typical controlled demolition.
One of the tallest in the world uh, other than the twin towers, the tallest.
Is there a straight down, symmetrical progression?
Let's look from West Street.
Uh, pretty straight down, pretty symmetrical.
How do you do that?
You have to take out all of the core columns within a fraction of a second of each other, followed about a second later by the perimeter columns, within a fraction of a second of each other, and then you have to repeat that floor by floor.
Now, directed energy weapons cannot do this.
A nuclear weapon cannot do this either.
And it would be much more obvious.
So they don't, the proponents of these theories don't provide us that minor detail, not minor at all.
These fires don't do it either, by the way.
We all agree on that.
They're few, they're small, they're scattered.
They're not going to provide that symmetrical progression.
If you don't get the control demolition charges going off just right, you get all kinds of problems like that.
And like this, somebody has to go back into that building and set those charges and fix them.
Buildings that are damaged on one side, like building seven in the northeast corner, according to the official narrative, should have fallen to the northeast.
Or if it was damaged from the north tower that hit it in the southwest corner of building seven, it should have fallen that way, but not straight down symmetrical and certainly not at free fall.
Now, Richard, just real quick, because this is kind of new for some people that may not have heard of Building 7.
A lot of people are kind of reawakening to this.
What exactly was Building 7?
Because, you know, the Twin Towers took such precedence of the focus on this.
This is a financial institution building.
More than half of it was occupied by Solomon Smith Barney.
Many other floors were divvied up to three-letter agencies like the CIA, the DIA, the DOD, the SEC, Securities and Exchange Commission, which lost thousands of files related to hundreds of cases that it was actively pursuing against Wall Street companies like Enron and WorldCom.
This was developed this building by Larry Silverstein in 1986, and he then purchased the rest of the seven six buildings in the World Trade Center and just six weeks prior to 9-11, which is very interesting.
Poor guy.
Poor guy.
Well, he came away with $5.6 billion.
Not poor guy.
Not poor guy.
That's what the asbestos abatement would have cost him alone.
Wow.
Which was pretty.
He was required by the New York State, the city of New York to comply with federal laws.
The port authority was.
So it went into private hands, and he didn't have to do that because he had his free asbestos abatement coming at the expense of the people who are dying of cancer today.
Larry Silverstein is still in New York.
He's a real estate mogul doing very well.
How fast is this building coming down?
Well, it's coming down at free fall.
That's as fast as a bowling ball falling out of the sky.
The bowling ball has no resistance.
This building had 40,000 tons of structural steel in it.
It shouldn't have come down that fast at all.
NIST finally acknowledges that it came down at free fall for a third of its seven-second fall.
How do you do that?
You have to take out all 82 columns in this building.
You miss one of them, and the building doesn't come down at free fall because those columns will give resistance.
This means that not one of these 82 columns gave any resistance.
How is a nuclear weapon going to take out all the columns in this building floor by floor such that there's no tilting and it comes down at free fall?
How is directed energy weapons going to achieve any kind of accuracy like that?
The most advanced example of the use of energy to affect steel is the Hutchinson effect, which has only been experimented on By Hutchinson in small tabletop exercises.
This is ludicrous to imagine that all these columns could be targeted independently to be taken out all at once and on each floor, subsequently synchronized floor by floor.
And these fires certainly couldn't do that.
We all agree on that.
Feature number five: how is this building coming down?
Well, this was a 47-story moment-resisting steel-frame structure, which falls into a pile just six stories tall, like a house of cards.
What we know from looking at the destruction is that the concrete has been pulverized.
We're going to talk about how that can happen by thermite.
We're going to talk about that's each individual floor.
And so it falls like a house of cards.
Buildings that fall naturally, like these in earthquakes, they fall over to the path of least resistance.
The column is not severed one from another.
Go ahead, Dean.
It's a small question at thermite.
Is thermite often used like in Vegas when they took down the star?
No, it's not common at all.
But it has been used for demolition on rare occasions.
And we'll get to the thermite.
Yeah.
But I wanted to mention that.
Are these fires going to bring this building down all of a sudden?
Severing all the columns?
No.
So what can?
Well, explosions can.
And guess what?
We have witnesses of explosions, starting with the deputy director of New York's Office of Emergency Management, Richard Rotanz.
Then he had to go into that building to assess it.
You could hear the building creak above us.
You could hear things fall.
You could hear the fire burning.
You could see columns standing from the upper floors, gaping holes in the floors up above us.
There was an elevator car that was blown out of its shaft and was down the hall.
What?
An elevator car blown out of its shaft that was down the hall.
Now, a nuclear weapon is not going to be blowing one elevator car out of its shaft and have it be down the hall on the north side above this core.
Directed energy weapons are not going to blow an elevator car up and out of its shaft, being down the hall.
So what can do that?
Well, explosions like our that are heard by Mayor Giuliani's attorney Michael Hess and Barry Jennings, who were going into this building.
They were late.
They didn't realize the building had been evacuated, but they're being called to the Emergency Office of Emergency Management, OEM.
And they get up there and they're told, get out of there.
We've evacuated that building for a reason.
And here is their experience on the way down.
When we got to the eighth floor, I started walking to one side of the building.
Sounded as it was gone.
The first explosion I heard when I was on the stairwell landing when we made it down to the sixth floor.
Then we made it back to the eighth floor.
I heard some more explosions.
You know, I'll suddenly sound like a boom, like an explosion.
So he's hearing explosions that are blowing him from the sixth floor back up into the eighth floor as he describes it.
Explosions that are localized in the building, affecting their lives.
This is not directed energy weapon.
This is a witness of two witnesses of explosions.
And this is not a nuclear weapon going off.
These are isolated explosions.
We have foreknowledge of this building's collapse.
We allowed it to burn, could we anticipate a collapse?
Uh says, uh uh, chief Hayden to this anonymous engineer who we're told had put a transit on the building and they're monitoring a bulge.
Well, he says he's pretty much right on the money in its cute current state.
You have about five hours.
Wait a minute.
Never before in history has a steel frame fire protected structure ever come down due to fire.
And now they're telling, not only is this one going to come down for the first time ever, but it's going to come down in about five hours.
And it does.
They won't release the name of this engineer.
It could, prediction could only have been made with foreknowledge.
So um, we also have uh, one of the top uh European controlled demolition experts.
Danny Jowenko is the expert on this in Europe.
What did he say?
This is Controlled Demolition.
You know, you know, you know.
There is nagesprong.
This is an operation.
It has done a team with experts.
Interesting.
A team of experts did this okay, so he knows what he's looking at.
He's expert in bringing buildings down.
Well, there are three dozen structural engineers uh, who agree.
Uh signed on to the petition demanding a new investigation.
A localized failure in a steel frame building like World Trade Center 7 cannot cause a catastrophic collapse like a house of cards, without a simultaneous and patterned loss of several of its columns at key locations within the building.
Are directed energy weapons capable of targeting those, those uh 82 columns on each of 47 floors?
How about nuclear weapons?
No, this caught the attention of professor Leroy Halsey, who did a four-year analysis of this building.
What was his conclusion?
That in order to take out the bring this building on the left in their computer model, the dynamic analysis uh, and have it look like the video of the collapse in the center, they had to take all the columns out uh.
Their essential findings, fire didn't cause a collapse of this building.
The temperatures were not high enough to cause the weakening of the steel framing.
Thermal expansion did not result in a loss of support for the beams and girders.
When he says the temperature was not high enough to cause the weakening the steel framing, he's talking about the nest theory.
He's challenging the NIST theory, which is collapse by fire.
Those fires were not hot enough but, as we'll see, there's plenty of heat which is unaccountable for from directed energy weapons.
Because that's a cool event, according to its proponents, which we'll get to, the collapse of World Trade Center was a global failure involving what?
The near simultaneous failure of every column in the building, not a progressive collapse as claimed by NIST.
Well, we have to look and see what could have brought this building down in the way that it was.
Well, we have evidence of Of extreme heat produced by none other than FEMA in the building performance assessment team report in May of 2002.
In this metallurgical examination of the steel at World Trade Center 7, where they document never before observed intergranular melting.
Melting steel takes 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit, which is capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese, like you see in this piece of World Trade Center 7 steel.
Watching Richard Gates.
This is not eroded by the Hutchinson effect.
This is typical thermite erosion degradation of steel by melting at high temperatures, which thermite causes producing silver dollar size holes in here, rapid oxidation and sulfidation, neither of which is an effect by the Hutchinson effect.
Liquid iron, that's molten iron, that's 3,000 degree Fahrenheit iron, temperatures which are denied by the directed energy weapons proponents.
Sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel.
So sulfur is a key component here.
Interesting.
We'll come back to that.
The New York Times says it's probably the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.
Yet, NIST, when they took over this investigation, they threw out most of this report and hid it because it's not consistent with their reality.
Steel members in the debris pile appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures, says the author of that report.
One of them, Richard, excuse me, this is Jonathan Barnett, fire protection engineer.
Guess what it takes to evaporate steel, Dean?
4,000 degrees.
Where is this heat coming from?
It's denied by the directed energy weapons proponents.
Maybe it's coming from nuclear weapons.
We'll see.
Wow.
Let me ask real quick too.
Now, this is on the heels, too.
I should give some current updates.
Rudy Giuliani, who had a big role in what, you know, the days to months and years following 9-11, but even the day of, he was just hit in a near-fatal car accident, I believe, just in the past 48 hours.
I got to keep rolling, Dean.
Yeah, I just wanted to say that the melted steel, do we know how long that was melting for?
And how long was it heating?
Three months.
The steel was fires were burning for that long.
This is incredible.
And this is used as evidence in the nuclear weapons theory.
It's denied altogether by the directed energy weapons theory.
But thermite has its own source of oxygen.
It can burn underwater, which is incredible.
And its survivability for that long is especially in nanothermite with these unburned ships that we're going to be looking at.
Okay, let's keep going.
I'll just write down my questions.
Go ahead.
This structural engineer, because I know we have a hard stop in 90 minutes.
Well, now an hour.
So I'm rushing.
I saw a melting of girders in the World Trade Center.
How do we get melting of girders?
We have 3,000 degree Fahrenheit temperatures, says this structural engineer.
He says, well, it must have melted underneath in the pile, which is ludicrous because it went, well, what's happening is these incredible temperatures are going on during the collapse of this building, as we'll show you.
We can tell the temperature of molten steel and iron by its color, its emissivity.
We know this is exceeding 2,500 degrees with bright yellow, and even hotter than that because it's white hot below.
Well, how do we get 2,500-degree temperatures?
There's nothing in the official narrative.
There's nothing in the directed energy weapons theory to account for this.
Jet fuel doesn't account for this.
It burns only 600 degrees Fahrenheit in open air, and jet fuel isn't even a factor in building seven.
But now we're talking about this evidence of extreme heat, which applies to the twin towers as well.
And there are several sources of this 600-degree maximum temperature of burning jet fuel in open air.
So some say it's twice that.
Okay, so what?
They're still missing two to three times the temperatures required to melt steel, 3,000 degrees.
Office fires only get at their absolute worst, 1,830 degrees.
Most of them are only 500 to 1,000 degrees.
So none of this evidence, none of the theories put forth by the government, certainly by the directed energy weapons folks, can account for this.
Thermite can account for it.
What is thermite anyway?
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 4,500 degrees Fahrenheit.
Quite enough to liquefy steel.
We know that open-air fires cannot burn hot enough to melt steel, but metal had melted at the base of the towers.
Appendix C of the FEMA report describes sulfur residues on the World Trade Center steel.
The New York Times called this the deepest mystery of all.
Sulfur slightly lowers the melting point of iron, and iron oxide and iron sulfide had formed on the surface of the structural steel.
Sulfur used with thermite is called thermate, producing even faster results.
Maybe we're getting somewhere here because if thermite were used, it would explain the presence of sulfur.
There is no other explanation for it in the DEW or Mini Nukes theories.
It would explain the presence of 4,000 degree temperatures, which is denied by the DEW folks.
And it would explain the presence of molten iron, which we're going to be looking at right now, which is permeated throughout all the World Trade Center dust examined by the U.S. Geological Survey in their 2005 particle atlas of the World Trade Center dust.
What do they find?
Billions of previously molten, that's 3,000 degrees, iron, not steel, not dustified steel.
There's no steel dust found in the dust by the U.S. Geological Survey or RJ Lee, who's also studied the dust, as you'll see.
So, no, this is melted iron.
How do they get spherical?
Well, aerosolized liquids form themselves into spheres.
In the case of molten iron, they cool, they fall with all of the dust, and that could be what's toasting the tops of the cars around the World Trade Center.
Liquid falling molten iron droplets as small as a 16th of an inch and smaller.
The EPA says we don't know what this stuff is or where it came from, but it's a signature component.
It's used to distinguish common office dust from World Trade Center dust.
In other words, it's not even World Trade Center dust unless it has all of these previously molten iron microspheres in it.
They account for up to 6% of these samples.
The official narrative denies these completely molten iron up to four tons altogether by extrapolation throughout all the World Trade Center dust.
RJ Lee Group, an environmental consulting firm, says they're formed during the event, not before by the welders putting the building together, not afterward by the iron workers taking the building apart, but during the event.
They're very clear what happened.
Well, you know what, Dean, we can do an experiment.
Experiment is the arbiter of competing hypotheses.
This was not done in the book, Where Did the Towers Go?
What we see when we burn thermite is molten iron microspheres that are that cool and fall in the pan as such.
And yes, if that were falling on cars, could it toast them?
You bet.
What else could toast cars?
Melted molybdenum, a metal which was found by the U.S. Geological Survey in this periodical table of the elements.
It melts at 4,753 degrees.
They have found and documented heat proving through all of these examples of evidence, but the highest one is this one: 4,700 degrees Fahrenheit.
This is completely denied, not dealt with, ignored by the directed energy weapons people.
It might be found created by nuclear weapons, but we'll get to that.
Lead evaporated.
Lead doesn't evaporate till 3,200 degrees.
This is documented, and they say the presence of lead oxide on the surface of the mineral wool indicates the existence of extremely high temperatures during the collapse, which caused metallic lead to volatilize, oxidize, and finally condense on the surface of the mineral wool.
All of these temperatures are systematically denied by the DEW people.
And they suggest somehow that the toasting of these tops of these cars is done by an exotic weapon.
Well, just look at them.
That's heat that does that.
Cooling, falling, liquid molten iron droplets.
Speaking of heat, the dust cloud hits us, then it gets real hot.
It felt like it was going to light up almost.
These are witnesses of hot clouds running from the hot clouds.
A wave, a hot, solid black wave of heat threw me down the block.
None of these quotes are in where do the towers go.
When I was running, some hot stuff went down my back because I didn't have time to put my coat on.
And I had some, well, I guess between first and second degree burns on my back.
And then we're engulfed in the smoke, which was horrendous.
One thing I remember, it was hot.
The smoke was hot, and that scared me.
I remember making it into the tunnel.
It was incredibly amount of wind, debris, heat.
All denied by DEW folks.
A huge, huge blast of hot wind, gusting, and smoke, and dust, and all kinds of debris hit me.
The super hot wind blew and just got dark as night.
You know, you couldn't breathe.
Well, all of that was a summary only of the evidence, which we have a whole hour of on extreme heat and witnesses thereof, including firefighters who are describing the hot molten iron.
Well, they call it molten steel flowing down the channel rails like lava from a volcano.
We have many witnesses of that.
I don't, I can't put them all in here because we're in such a rush, but all of that was evidence of ignited thermite and can only be that.
Is there any evidence of unignited thermite?
Well, here's Niels Herrett from Copenhagen, chemistry professor, a team of eight international scientists, documents seven independently connected samples.
They find red-gray chips, red on one side, gray on the other.
They're curious because they are attracted by a magnet.
So they have a high iron content.
Well, interesting.
Primer paint has iron in it, but not is not attracted by a magnet.
They get real, real curious.
They zoom in or analyze the red layer with XEDS, X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy.
And what do they find?
They find aluminum and iron, the ingredients of thermite.
What are the ingredients?
And manganese, ingredients of thermate.
What are the ingredients manganese is added to thermite and it helps it become thermate, much more effective at cutting through steel as a eutectic mixture, which was found and documented by FEMA in their appendix C that we talked about.
Well, fascinating.
What is the ingredients of thermite doing in the red layer?
They get real curious.
They zoom in 50,000 times with an electron microscope and they find nano-sized particles, particles of aluminum and iron oxide, the ingredients of thermite, that are a thousand times smaller than the diameter of a human hair.
Interesting.
They're set in a matrix, a bed of oxygen, silica, carbon.
This is unmistakable.
They go, what is this stuff we've come across?
Oh, it's super thermite.
Lawrence Livermore Lab developed this before 2001.
It's called superthermite.
We see when you get these particles so small, the surface volume increases exponentially.
And you've engineered an incendiary, which works by means of heat, massive heat, 4,000, 5,000 degree heat, which is the only explanation for all the extreme heat that we have been looking at in this summary.
And they've engineered it to become more explosive.
Explosives work by knocking things over by expanding of gases.
And that's what you have here: the expansion of organic material in the oxygen, silica, and carbon.
And that knocks things over.
It's very interesting stuff.
In the lab at Lawrence Livermore lab, they, in a differential scanning calorimeter, they can actually ignite it and measure the resulting heat that comes off of it.
And guess what?
It's an exothermic reaction.
That's exactly what the samples from the Niels Herrett team did.
So they know that this is a thermitic response.
It's not paint.
Paint doesn't have these exotic properties.
What do you think happens when it ignites?
It produces molten iron microspheres with the same chemical signature as the molten iron microspheres found and produced by USGS and RJ Lee in all of their studies.
This is all ignored in the DEW theory in the book.
Where did the towers go?
In fact, the denial of thermite is on page 124.
The denial of heat in fire is on page 257.
The denial of these extreme temperatures, which we've been looking at irrefutable, overwhelming evidence for, is denied on page 263 to 265 and 370.
The denial of the witnesses of molten metal on page 270, skewing their words, saying they don't know what they're talking about.
Denial of witnesses of a hot dust clouds occurring on page 299 and 480 of where did the towers go?
The denial of the heat source of the previously molten iron microspheres, which we just looked at, is denied on page 332, suggesting that this was somehow a cold event.
The denial of the heat-induced steel beam warping that can only be produced by four and 5,000 degree temperatures in the building seven steel, and particularly the twin towers steel coming up, denied on page 465.
So as if we didn't know where those previously molten iron microspheres have come from, they are found attached to partially ignited red-gray chips, as you see here and here.
So it's not a question where they came from.
The question is why are they located in the dust?
This is not made in a cave in Afghanistan.
This is made only in the most sophisticated advanced defense contracting laboratories.
Wow.
Wow.
I've never heard that before.
That is something.
We're going to skip this network break and we're going to continue on because now we're really getting into things I've never heard about with great detail before.
So continue on, Richard.
The conclusion of this report in the Bentham Open Chemical Physics Journal in 2009 states that the red layer is active, unreacted thermitic material incorporating nanotechnology.
It's a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.
This stands uncontested.
Nobody submitted their own peer-reviewed paper to contest these results.
And they're not dealt with in where did the towers go.
So we've looked at the 10 key characteristic features of controlled demolition appearing in Building 7.
Fire doesn't create any one of these.
Directed energy doesn't create any one of these.
Many nuclear weapons are not going to create any but the extreme heat, which we'll look at.
With additional circumstantial evidence and corroborative testimony, and by the way, the fires can't create any of these features, let alone all of them.
We find this to be proof of controlled demolition, a body of proof that's convinced 3,600 architects and engineers to sign on to the petition demanding a new investigation based on this evidence.
How many engineers have signed on to where did the towers go?
Or the many nuclear weapons?
So we got to look at the towers then, right?
Because if Building 7 was a controlled demolition, then the Twin Towers obviously are suspect by default.
Look at them.
Upward, outward, arching streamers, a geometry of fireworks, freely flying structural steel sections weighing four and eight tons, laterally ejected at 80 miles an hour, clocked by physicists.
landing up to 600 feet in every direction.
All of that is not dealt with by the, where did, and where did the towers go?
None of it is.
Now, maybe the mini nuclear weapons can say, it looks like a nuclear weapon going off.
We're still coming to that.
But why are these structural steel sections trailing thick white smoke clouds?
Steel is not flammable in office fire conditions.
Well, we've proven that thermite is operative here.
Let's look at the other byproduct of thermite, in addition to molten iron, thick white smoke clouds.
So now we know why the Twin Towers look like an erupting volcanic event.
Let's look and see if it has any of the features of controlled demolition, beginning with is there a sudden onset?
Well, yeah, the building is at rest and all of a sudden it's in uniform downward motion.
No jolt, no hesitation upon impact of the cold, hard steel below.
Same with the South Tower.
It's at rest and all of a sudden, it's in uniform downward, smooth motion.
How are we going to make sense out of this?
We're told that the upper part drove the rest of the building down to the ground and then destroyed itself.
Let's see if that's happening.
It's not happening.
In fact, I'm going to make it easier for you.
Look at the lower red line, the point of plane impacts.
The upper part is not driving anything down to the ground.
It's being destroyed in the first couple of seconds here.
Fascinating, huh?
What's destroying it?
We've been looking at some evidence of what that is.
But if it were there and driving the rest of the building down, we'd see it in the photographs, in the videos.
But it's not there.
None of them show an upper section driving the rest of the building down to the ground.
It's gone, as I mentioned, in the first couple of seconds.
If it were there, it would have destroyed these few remaining core columns standing 900 feet in the air for six seconds.
But no, something else is going on.
There's a destructive force blowing it out and away from these few remaining core columns, and they survive for about six seconds, and then they descend frame by frame.
You can see the top of this core column set through the concrete powder, which has been shaken off of it by presumably another explosion.
Yes, there's a lot of concrete powder.
No, there is no steel dust.
No, this interior column is not turning to dust before your eyes.
It is dropping straight down through the concrete powder that's been shaken off of it.
And we're tired of hearing magical fantasies that prop up theories that have no evidence to support them.
I'm referring to DEW there.
Look at it.
Which one's the volcano?
Which one's buildings?
I think that's a North Tower.
Upward, outward, arching streamers, a geometry of fireworks.
freely flying solid molten objects trailing thick white smoke clouds of aluminum oxide Yeah, i'll make it easier for you.
The volcanic eruptions on the right 2009, in the Tongan Sea.
So this is not what they told us.
It's not the upper part crushing the lower part and then crushing itself, which is put to us by Zdenik Bazan of Northwestern University in Chicago, a false theory which is used today as the key theoretical basis for Nist's column failure theory.
No, thanks to John Cole, who's given us a great theory.
What we're seeing is explosions and we're going to hear the witnesses of those explosions, all of which again, are denied by the Dew proponents.
Explosions blowing the building out and away from the core that remains for six seconds, 900 feet in the air feature.
Number two, do we have patterned explosions?
Well yeah, we got to look and see what.
What's really going on here?
There's 156 first responders of ex witnesses of explosions in the 12 000 pages of testimony that was hidden from us by the NEW YORK CITY until the NEW YORK Court State OF Appeals forced them to release it, and it's.
These are all on the website today.
Professor Graham Mcqueen read all 12 000 pages of the testimony.
He found 156 of them witnesses of explosions.
I could read all of them to you, but I don't have time, but you can read them all if you care to not cherry pick your evidence in.
Where did the towers go and deny the veracity of these witnesses?
Just listen to them.
We felt the ground shake, you could see the tower sway and then it just came down.
You can hear this order of events again and again.
They're seeing something, they're feeling something, they're hearing something about explosions before the towers collapse.
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.
Chick my bones.
Shortly before the first tower came down, I remember feeling the ground shaking.
I heard a terrible noise and then debris just started flying everywhere.
I saw a flash flash, flash at the lower level of the building.
You don't like when they demolish a building with each popping sound, initially in orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all the way around the building on both sides saw a number of brief light sources being emitted from inside the building between floors 10 and 15.
You saw about six of these brief flashes, accompanied by a crackling sound, before the tower collapsed.
Now they're not describing a nuclear explosion.
They're not describing the weakening of the steel by some proposed fantastical theory that somehow they scaled up the Hutchinson effect hundreds of thousands of times and can target these specific floors in order to make this building come down fairly symmetrically.
I saw low-level flashes.
I saw flash, flash, flash.
And then it looked like the building came down.
An explosion appeared at the very top simultaneously from all four sides.
Materials shot out horizontally.
And then there seemed to be a momentary delay before you could see the beginning of the collapse.
None of these explosions are a part of the official narrative.
None of them are a part of the DEW narrative.
And we're still coming to the nuclear narrative.
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, synchronized.
Nuclear weapons go off all at once.
And they're big booms.
And they're bright flashes, many times brighter than the sun.
And Jim and I are going to talk about this during the debate.
It seemed like on television when they blow up these buildings, it seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt.
All these explosions.
They're describing small series of explosions.
Building was blowing out on all four sides.
You actually heard the pops, you know?
You heard the pops of the building.
I thought the terrorists planted an explosive 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.
How many nuclear weapons are being outfitted in this building?
And how small are they?
Jim and I will talk about that.
Another loud earth-shattering blast with a large fireball that blew out more debris.
Numerous explosions by these witnesses.
The lower level of the building, you know, like when they demolish a building, that's what I thought I saw.
You see any flashes?
I said, yeah, I thought it was just me.
He said, no, I saw them too.
Multiple flashes, not one big flash.
Everybody, I think, at that point still thought these things were blown up.
So I was fully expecting anything else to blow up.
You were there when the planes hit?
No, I was there when the building exploded.
You mean when it fell down?
No, when it exploded.
He's damn sure what he saw, heard, and experienced, as are the 36 reporters who focus their reports on explosions.
We have many of them for you to play.
Here they are.
But as I was looking up, I saw the entire explosion.
It looked exactly like the first two, but we certainly had the most perfect damage point for that explosion.
It was unbelievable.
There has just been a huge explosion.
We can see a billowing smoke rising.
And I can't, I'll tell you that I can't see that second tower.
But it was another explosion on the far side of one of the buildings from where we're standing.
The reverberation and another explosion on the right-hand side.
Watch the right side.
On the far side of the building, there seemed to be another explosion, and also on the right-hand side, there was also another explosion.
We're not sure if that was an extra reverberation from what happened at the World Trade Center or if that was an added explosion.
We heard a very loud explosion.
We looked up and the building literally began to collapse before us.
Again, there has been a second explosion here in Manhattan at the Trade Center.
We are, and believe it or not, there was another major explosion.
The building itself, literally atop of it, came down, sending smoke and debris everywhere.
Do you know if it was an explosion or if it was a building collapse?
To me, it sounded like it.
To me, it sounded like an explosion, a huge explosion, a huge rumbling cloud.
We're taking photographs and securing this area just prior to that huge explosion that we all heard and felt.
But it literally exploded and came down as though it had been hit.
We heard an explosion.
That explosion happened with shooting pieces of the plane.
There are pieces of the plane on Church Street.
There's another explosion as we speak.
Something either exploded or fell off the side of the one building that was attacked.
Then the entire top of the building just blew up.
100 seconds ago, there was a huge explosion, and it appears right now the second World Trade Tower has just collapsed.
It was just a small explosion, and then rocks and debris and everything started pouring down.
And we were about two blocks away when the second explosion hit.
And all we heard was just a small explosion.
Then you saw a roar of an explosion and all kinds of smoke coming, bellowing out, debris falling down.
It's unbelievable because you hear these explosions.
In fact, I just heard another one.
I don't know if it was like an after effect or whatnot, just while you were on the phone talking about the school closing.
I'm hearing another explosion.
Just say now.
I'm hearing another rumble.
What you can feel when these turmoils come is that it literally comes up under your feet.
That's what it feels like.
That's the best way I know to describe it.
Certainly didn't imagine that there would be second or tertiary explosions.
So they parked some of their vehicles in those areas and many of those vehicles, people in those vehicles.
Interesting, some of these voices.
Well, we just heard another explosion go off a couple minutes ago.
We'll go on and look at the other witnesses of explosions before the towers came down.
We're talking about Pacific Palisades 20 miles north, which FEMA and NIST reports relied on the Columbia University for their theory.
The official narrative tells us that, hey, we have seismic events occurring at the time the planes actually hit the towers and they attribute it to the planes hitting the towers.
We have a 0.9 magnitude event at the North Tower.
We have a 0.7 magnitude event at the South Tower.
When did they really occur?
We have identical planes and identical buildings, yet very different on an order of magnitude almost because of the logarithmic scale of the seismic data.
So it doesn't make sense.
The same plane hitting the same building, producing quite different results.
So the seismic signals occurring before the plane impacts in the North Tower, we have 846 and 26 seconds is when the seismic event begins, but the plane doesn't even impact for another 14 seconds.
So how in the world can the seismic event be explained by the plane impact?
It can't.
And so NIST says, well, we did our own research and we found that the plane impacts 10 seconds before.
Excuse me.
We think the plane impacted four seconds after the seismic event started.
Well, you're still off by four seconds.
The NTSB radar is accurate to within one second.
Everybody knows that.
So what do they do?
They go to Columbia University and move their data back three seconds.
And we don't get that report at all.
What about the South Tower?
We have the seismic event occurring at 902 and 54 seconds, but the plane doesn't even impact here till 17 seconds later.
NIST says, oh, no, we don't think we don't, we don't agree with the NTSB radar anymore.
We looked at the videos, we came up, and we think that it happened 12 seconds earlier.
Well, you're still off by five seconds.
Well, again, they moved, get Columbia University to move that data back.
Well, that's darn interesting.
What could have produced those seismic events so far ahead of the plane impact?
Well, we have basement explosions by witnesses denied again by the in the in where did the towers go?
Mike Pecoro says the whole building seemed to shake.
There was a loud explosion.
The two arrived at the sea level.
They found the machine shop gone.
Nothing there but rubble.
We're talking about a 50-ton hydraulic press gone.
The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it too was gone somehow.
Steel and concrete fire door weighed 300 pounds, wrinkled up like a piece of aluminum foil, and lying on the floor, a bomb had gone off in the building before the planes hit the towers.
And that's documented by the janitor supervisor, Willie Rodriguez.
The bomb hit the lobby first, and a couple of seconds in the first plane hit.
Interesting.
And of course, William Rodriguez has many witnesses backing up his story that they're in the sea level of the basement and down below.
They heard a big explosion, pushed them up.
And then about seven seconds later, he hears bah from up above the plane that then hit.
And there are people that are injured.
His skin was torn off.
One gentleman.
So we have to go to experts who are willing to not lie to us, like Andre Rousseau, applied geophysics expert, author of more than 50 peer-reviewed papers, who says the frequency of the Raleigh waves attributed by LDEO to the plane impacts were only on the order of one hertz.
Aircraft crash impacts produce much higher frequencies, 10 to 100 hertz.
And these frequencies were even filtered out by the band pass filters used by the station.
So Andre says the Rousseau says the range of the instruments can't even measure those frequencies.
The seismic equipment is designed to detect seismic events like earthquakes and explosions around 1 hertz.
Well, that's interesting.
So the seismic events are not from the planes.
He says the actual waves generated by the crash had to have been deadened even before hitting or working their way down to the ground.
This is the flagpole standing up.
It's not going to generate, transfer all of that energy into the ground and 20 miles away.
So now we have to look at the seismic events that occur near the time of the collapse, which of course NIST attributes to the collapse.
And we have a 2.1 magnitude event at the South Tower and a 2.3 magnitude event at the North Tower.
Again, very different magnitudes.
Let's look at them.
The surface waves come at 1028 and 31 seconds that morning.
The tower starts descending about nine seconds before that.
The first debris hits the ground about that time, but the heaviest debris doesn't hit the ground till about four seconds later.
So, how can the heaviest debris create a seismic impact?
Well, NIST says, Well, we're going to talk to Columbia University and get them to move their data back again.
Three seconds.
No report, no countable accounting to the public.
But they completely ignore the very well-defined primary wave and shear waves that are occurring even before the tower starts descending.
What can cause those waves, which are not background seismic activity, four seconds before?
Oh, we're going to find out because explosions, which is consistent with the 156 first responders, are detected by cameras that are on the ground here at the South Tower and the North Tower, excuse me, and you just saw the shake.
So that shake occurs.
The tower hasn't come down yet.
No, it shakes about the time the witnesses heard explosions, corroborating their testimony.
How about at the North Tower from a tripod-mounted camera on top of a roof, looking at the building, and there is the shake.
And about 10 seconds later, this building comes down, just like the North Tower comes down there.
So fascinating.
What about the South Tower?
We have the event occurring at 9:59 and 04 seconds.
The tower starts collapsing five seconds before that, but the first debris doesn't even hit the ground for another seven seconds.
And so what does NIST do with that?
They say, well, we looked at our videos, and we think that the debris we think that the seismic event occurred three seconds later.
Again, no report.
Well, what could have produced the event again with above normal, above background seismic activity four seconds before, three seconds before the start of the actual collapse of the building?
Well, this would corroborate also the first responders.
Does anything corroborate the seismic data?
Yeah, we have in the South Tower a tripod-mounted camera that's shaking three seconds before.
And it's very subtle.
That's it right there.
I didn't move the camera.
And three seconds later, this is publicly available for everybody.
The building comes down.
So corroborating the first responders.
The official narrative tells us, oh, this is due to debris hitting the ground, but we just saw that's impossible.
But it also, it's not hitting the ground.
These four and eight-ton structural steel sections are peppering the ground one at a time.
It's ludicrous to compare the seismic activity from these towers, Which are not crashing onto the ground, but blowing out with individual freely flying structural steel sections peppering not even the ground, but the diaphragm, the plaza deck, the concrete deck.
So, and they don't and they hit over a period of 15 seconds.
They're not even going to even produce a seismic event.
And they're equally distributed over the entire superblock of the World Trade Center.
No, this is not the kingdome, which is very different, as we'll see.
And one of these is 1.6 times greater in energy than the other.
We're talking about a 2.1 versus a 2.3 on the logarithmic scale.
1.6 and that makes no sense given the identical buildings and nearly identical collapses that they could have such great energy differences unless there were different quantities of explosives in the building for some reason.
And that's what Andre Rousseau comes up with in 2012.
So we then go to feature number three.
Is there a straight down symmetrical progression?
By the way, the Seattle Kingdome is a 25-ton concrete roof, which does fall to the ground and produce, I think it was over a two-magnitude.
So that indeed is going to register on the Richter scale at that quality, at that magnitude.
So we have a straight-down symmetrical collapse.
Well, the South Tower begins to actually tip over.
It's tipping over at 22 degrees.
So we have asymmetrical loading on the structure below, asymmetrical damage from the building, from the broken columns from the plane, asymmetrical damage from the fires.
How in the world then do we get complete symmetrical damage all the way around each face of the building, just like the firefighters described?
It makes no sense given all the asymmetry up above.
What are we looking at?
Are we looking at directed energy weapons taking out each floor of columns a tenth of a second and then the next floor directed energy weapons removing the weakness without explosions, which were heard by all of these first responders?
Or are we looking at a nuclear weapon which somehow ignited down below, maybe in the basement, if you go with the Dmitry Kalazov theory or suitcase nukes up above?
No, this is floor by floor, individual, precisely synchronized explosions.
Let's zoom in on the leading corner of these explosions in this looped video.
What do we see?
Individual explosions, which must have been pre-placed floor by floor.
You can see them.
You can see the squibs or isolated explosive ejection occurring down below.
This is not a nuclear weapon going off.
This is hundreds, if not thousands, of individual explosions that are, as we've seen, thermite-based and most likely high-energy explosives, as you'll see.
And many of them are mistimed, isolated explosive ejections called squibs in the control demolition industry.
Here we see them occurring as far down as 20 stories below, 40 stories below the zone of destruction.
They occur even as far down as 60 stories down below.
There's no accounting for these phenomena whatsoever in the directed energy weapons hypothesis, which is why they never talk about it.
These are not nuclear weapons going off way down below here either.
They can only be pre-placed and probably mistimed explosions.
Here on the left side of the south tower, as it begins to lean right, you see a dozen of these isolated explosive ejections ejecting out of the towers themselves.
And then we have the lateral ejection of those structural steel sections weighing four and eight tons impaling themselves in buildings up to 600 feet away.
This is incredible explosive force hurling these freely flying structural steel sections that far.
Directed energy weapon has no capability to do that.
At least it hasn't been produced.
It hasn't even been hypothesized by Dr. Judy Wood.
These structural steel sections have four bolt holes at the ends of them.
All the plane had to do was to push in those heavy structural steel sections.
The columns are three stories tall, welded together by the spandrel panels, and shear off all 12 bolts that we're looking at here.
Most of these columns were not sliced.
And yes, they're ejected laterally.
They are freely flying.
This is not a banana peeling, as has been described in the Where Do the Towers Go book.
Look at this one.
It's about to hit building seven.
Let's go back to, forward, two.
That's freely flying.
What's the energy source that ejected that section that far and horizontally?
How does gravity work?
Down.
How would we expect this structure to come apart if it were indeed all the columns were targeted synchronistically timed by directed energy weapons?
Down.
It would weaken the steel and it would just go down.
But what we see is out.
And it is not a banana peeling.
It's about to hit building seven.
And what is it trailing?
Thick white smoke clouds.
Why?
Because the aluminum oxide ash, the other byproduct of thermite, in addition to molten iron, is on the ends of these structural steel sections.
All of them.
There's enough energy here, by the way, to hurl a 200-pound cannonball three miles.
This is explosive force with a 1,200-foot diameter, actually 1,400-foot diameter, blowing these pieces well beyond the boundaries of ground zero.
And by the way, if 100,000 tons or most all of that steel is distributed outside the footprint, as we can see in this aerial photography of the site, the steel, the perimeter columns and core columns are ejected outside of the perimeter, the north tower there, the south tower here.
It didn't disappear.
It didn't turn to dust.
There's no steel dust found by anyone or documented in the, where did the towers go, book?
In the dust.
If the steel turned to dust, it would be in the dust.
No, what they do find is previously molten iron microspheres, about four tons of them.
So what's driving this?
We just have about a few minutes.
I have to just inform you, we got about a good five minutes left, and this is so compelling.
We may have to go even just a little longer if we can, but this is so compelling.
But go ahead and finish your thoughts.
Thank you for that.
Heads up, Dean.
Appreciate that.
If 100,000 tons of steel framing is distributed outside the footprint, you have to ask yourself, what's crushing the building?
There's a missing component here.
There's nothing left to crush the building.
That's important.
Maybe it's the concrete because we're missing 110 floors of concrete.
They're not found at the bottom.
You don't see them.
Four and eight inch thick concrete on metal decking, poured on metal decking supported by lightweight steel trusses.
We're looking for pancakes here.
We don't see them.
So while I do agree with the directed energy weapons factoid that there's no pile, there's not enough steel here at the bottom.
We saw where the steel went.
It went out.
It didn't disappear.
In a real pancaking collapse, we're looking for pancakes.
This is a 33-story building destroyed by an earthquake.
Its pile is three, four times the size, the height of the World Trade Center pile.
Where are the pancakes?
We're looking for pancakes.
This 33-story building compared to 110-story building is 30, 40, 50 feet tall.
Look at the people on the lower right.
We're missing pancakes.
We're missing concrete.
Oh, there's the concrete.
It's pulverized in midair.
What can pulverize 90,000 tons of concrete is the question?
Jim's going to suggest that nuclear weapons can, and I don't doubt that.
But I'm going to suggest that there are several sources from the American Society of Testing and Materials report C856, which says that even at temperatures of only 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit, concrete turns to white powder and decomposed hydration products.
That's gravel, sand, cement, paste.
This is documented by others as well.
Concrete specimens subjected to temperatures of 2,200 degrees Fahrenheit were completely decomposed by what?
Heat, not explosive detonation speeds, which Mark Hightower and Jim have criticized for over a dozen years, the capability of nanothermite to do, and for good reason.
But now we know that it's the heat, not the detonation speed, that's pulverizing the concrete.
That's important.
This is not the building turning to dust.
This is concrete powder that's been pulverized.
And now we know why.
It's steel that's been distributed laterally.
By the way, if 90,000 tons of concrete in each building is pulverized and spread over three square miles, what's crushing the building?
It wasn't the steel.
That was a third of the weight of this building.
It's not the concrete.
That's another third. of the weight of the building.
Two-thirds the weight of each building is not available to crush it.
So what, how did they get these materials in here?
I'm just going to speculate based on the research by Kevin Ryan in DigWithin.net that they weren't doing fireproofing upgrades in the months or years before 9-11.
They were applying liquid applied nanothermite on the bottom of those concrete slabs, which would then at 4 and 5,000 degrees evaporate the metal decking, evaporate the steel trusses, and return the concrete to its original hydration products dry.
How else did they have access?
Well, if they had access to the elevators, they'd have access to the core columns and beams in the building.
There's a lot of gypsum boards surrounding these hoistways, so they'd have to make quite a mess.
And yes, there was a mess in the weeks before 9-11.
It was probably the week leading up to 9-11.
Every morning I'd come in around 7 a.m. and the dust was incredible.
It was selfie.
It was like the cleaners weren't cleaning.
Right where the windows were, there was a cell which enclosed radiators.
I was sick to death of the dust which was appearing on the windowsills.
It was dirty gray and very, very noticeable.
Very noticeable indeed.
Well, Ace Elevator had the contract.
They had 85 employees, but they were called out to a meeting that day.
So they weren't available to help the firefighters.
They had a union meeting.
So they were pulled out to discuss some business.
That's convenient.
180,000 tons of steel.
Where did it go?
Easily the largest and most perplexing structural failures in history.
400 truckloads a day.
Carted off to China before investigators could get their hands on it and do a proper forensic investigation.
This is the illegal destruction of evidence in a crime scene, causing many to cry out.
Crucial evidence could answer many questions is on the slowboat to China, showing an astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough scientific investigation.
So we have all the key features of controlled demolition and twin towers and some very uncharacteristic features as well, with additional circumstantial evidence and corroborative testimony.
None of these features, by the way, can be accounted for by directed energy weapons.
Not one of them.
Or NIST's official theory of fire.
And most of them can't buy nuclear weapons either.
when we have opportunity Jim and I are going to talk about no planes and we're going to following sequence we're going to talk about 53 separate recordings yeah yeah that is on that That's exciting.
And we unfortunately have to pull the curtain just a little bit, but you can catch the main debate coming this Saturday.
But also, you don't want to miss Jim's rebuttal to Richard.
As you can see here, this coming Thursday, Jim Fetzer presents his case for nuclear and why Richard is wrong and he is right.
And we can't wait for that.
Richard, any kind of final, maybe thoughts you want to share with this worldwide effective audience here at Real Deal Meeting?
Everybody has just been so engaged, but really glued to their seat because a lot of this either people maybe forgot about or really have never heard before.
Final thoughts, Richard.
Yeah, I just want to encourage everyone to do your research thoroughly.
Don't believe something because it sounds futuristic or something you haven't thought of before.
Critically analyze all the evidence, not just that which is provided to you in fancy books that are an inch and a half thick that are full of fantasy.
You've got to think critically.
And I'm looking forward to thinking critically with Jim and going through the evidence on when we have the opportunity on Saturday at 9 p.m. Eastern on your station, Dean.
And I'm looking forward to seeing Jim's presentation Thursday.
I'm tickled pink to have this discussion.
But I'm curious how we can find time to present.
I think what we'll focus on today is what we did.
And when Jim and I get together, I'll walk through just the evidence of plane impacts, plane parts picked up,
seen picked up by Captain Richard Patterson, dozens and dozens and dozens of plane parts and talk about why what the evidence is for planes definitely hitting the towers, even though it seems like they couldn't push these.
I'll try to represent the DEW, you know, and just to let people know what they're saying, you know, just when we get to that segment.
But Richard Gage, everybody, how about a round of applause if you're out there?
Because he's a busy man.
He's one of the hardest working men out there, just still pushing the truth about this dreadful day in American history.
So, Richard, thank you for being here.
And I look forward to seeing you this coming Saturday for this Saturday main event.
It's going to be awesome.
And thank you so very much, Dean.
Appreciate you sponsoring this debate.
You bet.
I wish I could do more.
Okay, well, there you have it, everybody.
Richard Gage.
I want to thank everybody who's new for finding us.
If you can see us through all of the censorship, and to thank all of our regulars for being here tonight, as this is a most monumental moment for Real Deal Media, but for this new generation to learn the truth about what happened that day.
And I tell you, this really makes me upset because it brings me back because knowing what we all know now and who's behind it gets me angry.
So on that note, until next time, Fort Richard Gage and everyone else here at Real Deal Media.
I'm Dean Ryan.
Thank you for sharing a bit of your night.
And always remember to stay tuned and stay awake.
▲
Export Selection