Interview 1471 – 9/11 Revisited with Corbett, Gage and Grove

by | Aug 12, 2019 | Interviews | 22 comments

via In this conversation, James Corbett of The Corbett Report, Richard Grove of and Richard Gage of talk to Christopher McMillan, a student of the AUTONOMY course at about 9/11. Topics discussed include an investigation into the destruction of WTC 7 at the University of Alaska and the recent call by New York City fire commissioners for a new investigation into 9/11. They also answer questions from the class.

VIDEO COURTESY: Tragedy And Hope

“WTC 7 Did Not Collapse from Fire” – Dr. Leroy Hulsey, UAF, Sept. 6, 2017

New York Area Fire Commissioners Make History, Call for New 9/11 Investigation

9/11 Suspects: Christine Todd Whitman

Info on WTC elevator upgrades

Info about radar blind spots on 9/11

Project Constellation


    • Basically an operational meeting. I want to talk with Richard & James about their research on Ace Elevator. Make results accurate? I like that!

  1. It cannot be emphasized loudly enough the significance of the Franklin Square and Munson Fire District coming on board, fully and “on fire” to 911 Truth, in an official capacity.

    As one might interpret and/or paraphrase Richard Gage as meaning and saying, respectively, with regard to James’ cynicism – or what Gage would prefer referring to as skepticism – is that maybe it has simply come the time for a breakthrough to finally occur, sighting the unprecedented involvement of the aforementioned fire district. Amen to that!

    Also of much interest was the discussion involving a contract “given” to Ace Elevator Company for the modernization of the elevators in the Twin Towers.

    This is very curious, and I would concur highly unusual. Though it wasn’t actually mentioned, if Otis Elevator Company had been the company maintaining the elevators, the chances are great that the elevators in the towers were, indeed, Otis elevators.

    Key components of the operating systems of Otis elevators are proprietary, meaning that such components are not readily available to other companies, making it extremely arduous for another company to work on Otis’ equipment. Furthermore, by Otis’ own doctrine, their maintenance employees are tasked to “walk away” from maintaining equipment installed by others, therefore making little or no sense for the owners of the Twin Towers to have farmed out any modernization contract to any other company besides Otis.

    Said contract and/or any other related documents concerning Ace Elevator’s involvement in the modernization of the elevators should be legally summoned to be studies and if appropriate, brought before the special grand jury.

    My hat’s off to Richard Gage for his tremendous work in deconstructing the official framework of the 911 deception.

    Maybe, just maybe, after 18 years, the time for Truth has finally arrived.

    • candlelight-

      Interesting details about the elevator industry. Thanks.

    • Are you saying only Otis can install and maintain their elevators? If so that seems like a weird distribution model for a manufacturer. I would not expect them to be such a popular Brand if they had to manage not only their manufacturing base including R&D, as well as installation crew. It would make more sense if the manufacturer in question followed a fairly industry standard method of training independent contractors to be approved installers. I think your vertical integration strategy argument doesn’t make logical sense.


        Correct. Otis can and typically does install as well as maintain their elevators. Whether or not Otis themselves actually manufacture all of the components of their elevators, I cannot say with certainty. But, that’s really beside the point. Some of the equipment that goes into Otis’ elevators are proprietary, so either they make these things themselves, or some other entity makes it for Otis, whereby Otis, by rights, would own a patent for such proprietary equipment/components. Otis does claim to develop and manufacture and market their elevators.

        Such a monopolistic business model – developing, producing and maintaining proprietary equipment, especially when there’s not that many elevator companies to choose from makes perfect sense. Basically, once Otis, or presumably any elevator company with a similar business model, is awarded a winning bid, the building owner is essentially married to that company, for maintenance, upgrades and/or modernization. It is claimed that Otis is the largest elevator company in the world, and they did, indeed, install and maintain their elevators in the World Trade Center….until 1994.

        Coincidentally, that’s one year following the FBI-coordinated false flag attack in 1993.

        I’d love to see any internal memos relating to the decision to discontinue Otis’ maintenance contract and opting for Ace Elevator to maintain Otis’ elevators. That, to me, is what does not make any sense!

        It’s also sickening to hear that, as Richard Gage states, the
        Ace Elevator crew “…ran like rats…” the day of 9/11.

        You would think that in the immediacy of such an emergency these guys would stick around and use their expertise to do anything they could to help out, as was reported back in 1993 of Otis’ maintenance workers doing whatever they could to help out. Even if the elevators were damaged beyond their means, I can’t imagine them fleeing in such a fashion as described by Gage.

        It’s been speculated that the planning of 9/11 dates all the way back to that first false flag in 1993. Could dumping Otis in 1994 and hiring a relatively small, two-bit elevator company like Ace have been a part of that planning??

        Subpoena the records!!!

  2. 911. . . Steven Jones PhD in physics at Brigham Young University said in 2007 it was Thermite that brought down the towers, thus all set up and phony. It cost him his job.

  3. flammable-

    You ask valid questions. I would like to respond.

    1) “It is understandable…”
    Only if you consider that most people have no knowledge of how controlled demolition takes place, what it looks like physically.

    2) “How can it get through building security?”
    Who has control of building security? Not the security guards. They are employees who do what they are told.

    3) “There must be too many people needed…”
    Compartmentalization. At every level of an operation, those who are needed or useful are only told what they need to know to complete their specific task. They are not informed of the whole picture. They are just doing a job. And when someone does know more than they are supposed to, they had better make arrangements for who will be feeding their pets in the future.

  4. Great work James,

    Thank you for your good works.


    • I’m not suggesting that it does, my apologies for not making that clear from the start.

      What I’m saying is that this looks like an exquisite example of astroturfing where the controlled narrative is so overbearing that even evidence supportive of the official narrative is being kept occluded.

      I have seen a video on YT testifing to fact of the wtc7 sustaining massive damage when coming into collision with the falling tower, but it’s been memory holed.

      • Again, I’m talking about heavy damage on WTC7, not office fires.

        There is/was a video on youtube showing one of the towers falling (the one which had the top proken off prior to falling down) from an angle from which it can be seen that the broken off section of the building cuts into WTC7 and does extensive damage on its (north, is it?) side, spanning several floors.

        Again, I’m not saying that WTC7 wasn’t brought down in a controlled fashion. I’m not saying anything that has been done there hasn’t been planned months in advance.

        What I am saying is that someone is going through quite an effort to obfuscate facts, even those that may be supportive of the narrative.

        • No, but somewhat close. The one I’m reffering to shows the building prior to when the smoke started gushing out. At that point in time and from that angle, a large opening was evidently visible.

  5. I’ll have to watch these when I get more time. The last video does match the point of view of the video I’m talking about but this one has more smoke.

    Again, I’m not claiming the building wasn’t brought down via convectional means and use of explosives. Hopefully this is the last time I need to repeat that.

  6. Olaf,

    Besides, after letting a number of years go by while they, NIST, scratched their heads trying to figure out how to obfuscate reality by stating to the gullible public that one singular column in the building “shifted” causing the whole building to collapse, you would think they would have desperately jumped and grabbed at the notion that tower debris sliced and diced and gouged out a significant section of a side of the building, yadayadayada…. That no mention of the sort was ever promulgated by these morons, means then, that this story of cataclysmic destruction from fallen debris is a complete fabrication courtesy of the usual, anonymous, Internet fraudulent hucksters.

    What else is new?

    • By the way, Olaf, planes did hit the goddamned buildings. Which planes? Good question. But, to suggest otherwise is to get sucked down a fathomless, useless, obfuscatory blind hole. The precise hole the big players want you to get yourself stuck in, where you will do absolutely no harm, only good. lol Good, in this case, being utterly subjective, of course.

  7. These days were some days were I did intensely regret not to have build some video-producing skills and an audience.
    The Hasan Piker controversy provided such a good opportunity.
    I probably would have even titled the video America deserved 9/11 for ultimate provocation/clickbait purposes.

    The fault outrage, especially by all those of the “free speech advocate” crowd was again so infuriating, sad, despicable and unoriginal.

    At least three layers for the video:
    Very short cynical on Karma.
    Then the most important: Who of the outraged audience knows of the firefighters? Who even knows? And you pretend to care?!? Visited events, donated, offered expertise? Are you aware they are still fighting and crushing health effects are a burden?
    Were you celebrating Giuliani and that woman in the description as heroes?

    Third layer: People publishing about We need a new Pearl Harbor. People close to influence and power. So you could somewhat build the case that America deserved this as ‘America’ allowed such people to dictate/majorly influence their legislative and foreign policies, couldn’t you? (Other variations possible like America did it do itself thus deserved it but this would be hard to convey to the targeted audience.)
    Then there is a connection to the climate change agenda where we have this pearl harbor rhetoric repeated and WWII mobilisation asked for – be careful what you wish for.

    What or who is America I probably would not have much discussed – semantics.

    Anyway, excellent opportunity to get a new crowd to look at the firefighters and the whole 911truth situation
    and to smack all those boring “culture warriors” who suppose to support free speech but then shout someone down who immediately pedalled back and apologized – yeah, great atmosphere where you really like to sometimes say something dumb or emotional. And especially at someone who constantly poisons minds but only at these once uttered 9/11 words you really start hitting him hard.

    The real sad thing: Me or anyone else out there not making such a video.

Submit a Comment


Become a Corbett Report member