If you accept the fact that the collapse of the WTC buildings was guaranteed by the use of controlled explosives, you then need to accept that the only people who could have organised the setting of these explosives were either highly skilled US intelligence operatives, or those who owned and ran the buildings, or both.
So then you have to be very suspicious of the fact that the World Trade Centre was sold by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey - just seven weeks before 9/11/01 - to Silverstein Properties Inc., which is owned by Larry A. Silverstein. Silverstein also owns a 52-story building at 140 Broadway, just one block southeast of the Trade Center, which he currently leases out to Prescott Bush's old company, Brown Brothers Harriman & Co.
BushWorld is full of funny little coincidences like that. Here's another:
The New York Times reported, without citing sources, that Silverstein Properties executives canceled a meeting Monday night [9/10/01] to discuss the risk of terrorism to the towers, because one person was unavailable. The meeting was to have taken place on the 88th floor of one of the towers.You might wonder about that. You might also wonder why there were evacuation drills in the weeks before 9/11, or why the planes hit in the early morning, shortly before most workers entered the building. But mostly you have to wonder about the way the buildings collapsed...
You also have to be very suspicious of the clean-up job. For example, the residue of the steel pillars which suported the towers could have been used as evidence to prove or disprove the use of explosives, yet this steel was whisked off-site with unusual alacrity, and shipped to Asia, where it was melted down.
You also have to be very suspicious of the Bush administration's 9/11 Commission, which overlooked many key aspects of the collapse.
You might begin to wonder if the terrorists themselves set off the explosions, but then you would have to explain why they also bothered to fly planes into the buildings. Plus you still would need answers for the above questions.
You then need to look at the plane which hit the Pentagon and ask similar questions. For example, another coincidence: The section of the Pentagon hit consisted mainly of recently renovated, unoccupied offices.
Before too long, you might start to think that there is only one explanation that makes sense. But it is so hugely conspiratorial, so violently criminal, so extraordinarily beyond the pale of normal everyday life, that you just shake your head and say it cannot possibly be true.
But what if controlled explosives really WERE used in the WTC collapse?
Here is the video you don't want to see: 9/11 Revisited
3 comments:
Are you suggesting complicity of Frank Lowey? Why is feature that he is Jewish? I don't like the implication that because someone is Jewish they are part of this big Zionist conspiracy to create greater Israel and/or rule the world. If being Jewish is a feature of a story, then include it, if not then you ditch the unnessary descriptor. I say this as a gentile.
If he bought the WTC a few weeks before, then he would have not had the opportunity to secretly yet very professionally lay charges in all three buildings, and I also say, in the video you linked to a very plausable explanation for the detonators in WTC 7 - that the fire dept decided not to fight the fires they as they had already lost more men than they should have that day, and they decided to pull it.
This explanation is completely buried in the conspiratorial tone of the report you link to.
Wadard,
Sorry, I cited Frank Lowy by mistake and later corrected the text to say that Larry Silverstein is the owner. Lowy was nevertheless a critical part of the deal to buy the WTC, with Westfeild's lease of the retail areas helping provide sufficient the funds for the purchase.
I am not saying Lowy was definitely part of the 9/11 conspiracy, but I think you have to accept that there is a pro-Zionist stance to the Bush neo-conservatives and the fact that so many key players are also Jewish is more than just a bloody coincidence. Add that to AIPAC, etc...
You think "Jewish" is an unnecessary descriptor, I think that in the current environment it is a point worth noting. Same goes for Andy Card's Jewish replacement and the Jewish publisher
of the NYT.
I would think that seven weeks was more than enough time to plant explosives, given they had already run detailed building inspections prior to purchase (the deal was planned for months if not years). And the fact that Silverstein spoke on air about "pulling" Building Seven only adds to the suspicions, in my mind anyway. If you can find any follow-up on this odd comment, please let me know!
'PULLING IT' IS DEMOLITION INDUSTRY TALK FOR BRINGING A BUILDING DOWN IN A CONTROLLED FASHION. Oh, sorry for the shouting. Caps lock on and now you know that I touch type.
Oh, that makes a little more sense if you replace Lowy with Silverstein. He said in the video the fire deptartment told him they want him to pull WTC7 because of too many nyfd deaths on that day.
That's plausable.
Post a Comment