OWNER OF WTC ADMITS EXPLOSIVES WERE USED!
Listen to this PBS interview with Larry Silverstein, owner of the WTC, describing how he had Building #7 demolished!
MP3 of Silverstein “Pull It”
(The Fire Department) were not sure that they were gonna be able to contain the fire. I said, you know,
we´ve had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. They made that decision to pull and then
we watched the building collapse
In the demolition industry, “pull” is the common term they use for demolishing buildings with explosives.
Silverman is talking about how a decision was made between him and the New York Fire Department to 'Pull' the building.
And there is no doubt the meanings of his words, captured in context. He is admitting on public TV that a decision was made
between him and the NYFD to use a controlled demolition to fell WTC 7 on 911. And all of this AFTER the official FEMA report,
costing millions said otherwise, and they had all the experts.
In order to appreciate the severity of this evidence, you must first understand that demolishing a building is not something
you can do in a few minutes by tossing explosives into a basement. It actually takes days of planning. First you have to pinpoint
all the load-bearing structures, then you have to wire everything and set the cutting charges so they all go off in a pre-destined
order. Which means that this demolition was planned long before 9-11!
Here is the footage of WTC 7 getting "pulled". Click on the image to view a close-up video of the explosive charges shooting
up the building.
The official story to this day is that WTC 7 fell because of fire., just like Towers 1 & 2.
But we all know that “official” does not always mean “true”!
So now you have to ask yourself...
Why would this man destroy his own buildings?
Six months before the attacks on the World Trade Center, the World Trade Center was "privatized" by being leased to a private
sector developer. The lease was purchased by the Silverstein Group for $3.2 billion 6 weeks before 911. But the World Trade
Towers were not the real estate prize the Silverstein Group might have been led to believe. The towers required some $200
million in renovations and improvements, most of which related to removal and replacement of building materials declared to
be health hazards in the years since the towers were built. Other New York developers had been driven into bankruptcy by the
costly mandated renovations, and $200 million represented an entire year's worth of revenues from the World Trade Towers.
The attacks on 9/11 changed the picture. Instead of renovation, Silverstein is rebuilding, funded by the insurance coverage
on the property which 'fortuitously' covered acts of terrorism. Even better, Silverstein filed TWO insurance claims for the
maximum amount of the policy, based on the two, in Silverstein's view, seperate attacks. The total potential payout is $7.1
billion, more than enough to build a fabulous new complex and leave a hefty profit for the Silverstein Group, including Larry
Silverstein himself.
As reported in The Washington Post, the insurance company, Swiss Re, has gone to court to argue that the 9/11 disaster
was only one attack, not two and that therefore the insurance payout should be limited to $3.55 billion, still enough to rebuild
the complex.
The destruction of the World Trade Towers may make Silverstein one of the wealthiest men alive.
COMMON SENSE
The towers fell in roughly 10 seconds, that is, that they fell at about the same rate that an object falls through air.
The fact that the towers fell this quickly (essentially at the rate of free-fall) is conclusive evidence that they were
deliberately demolished.
Believing that there is nothing wrong with the towers collapsing so quickly, is roughly analogous to believing that people
pass through closed doors as quickly as they pass through open doors.
The fact that they fell at such a rate means that they encountered essentially no resistance from the supposedly undamaged
parts of the structure. That is, no resistance was encountered from any of the immensely strong parts of the structure that
had held the building up for the last 30 years. This just doesn't happen, unless, of course, the lower part of the building
has lost its structural integrity (And this is usually due to the detonation of a multitude of small explosive charges as
seen in controlled demolitions).
You have seen the evidence. The footage, the eyewitness reports, the seismographs, the infrared shots, the molten steel.
They all point to one thing…
The World Trade Center was not destroyed by terrorists. It was a controlled demolition, an inside job!
FEMA CLAIMS IGNORANCE
While steel is often tested for evidence of explosions, despite numerous eyewitness reports of explosions in the towers,
the engineers involved in the FEMA-sponsored building assessment did no such tests.
Dr. W. Gene Corley, who investigated for the government the cause of the fire at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco and
the Oklahoma City bombing, headed the FEMA-sponsored engineering assessment of the WTC collapse. Corley told AFP that while
some tests had been done on the 80 pieces of steel saved from the site, he said he did not know about tests that show if an
explosion had affected the steel. "I am not a metallurgist," he said.
SELLING THE EVIDENCE OVERSEAS
Much of the structural steel from the WTC was sold to Alan D. Ratner of Metal Management of Newark, New Jersey, and the
New York-based company Hugo Neu Schnitzer East. Ratner, who heads the New Jersey branch of the Chicago-based company, quickly
sold the WTC steel to overseas companies, reportedly selling more than 50,000 tons of steel to a Shanghai steel company known
as Baosteel for $120 per ton. Ratner paid about $70 per ton for the steel. Other shipments of steel from the WTC went to India
and other Asian ports.
So why have you not heard of this until now? Where is the media coverage? The public outrage?
WITNESSES SILENCED BY GOVERNMENT
Can you say "repression"?
NEW YORK COURT CENSORS TESTIMONIES OF 911
(1) denied the motion of nine family members of persons who died on 9/11 for leave to intervene as
petitioners (Family Members), and
(2) directed disclosure of the oral histories albeit redacted to delete the employees'
personal expressions of feelings, opinions and recommendations.
…Not falling within the intra-agency exception are the personal expressions of feelings contained in the oral histories,
and we accordingly modify to direct disclosure of such expressions.
In other words, if a firefighter who was interviewed said, "I heard what sounded like explosions and I think it was bombs
that took down those towers, it was all so horrible", the press will merely get the portion that says: "it was all so horrible".
There is more..
(3) directed disclosure of the 911 tapes and transcripts albeit redacted to delete the opinions and
recommendations of respondent's employees, and further redacted to delete the words of 911 callers other than those related
to the Family Members, unanimously modified, on the law, to grant the motion to intervene, and to direct disclosure of respondent's
employees' personal expressions of feeling contained in the oral histories, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.
Translation for you non-lawyer types: The transcripts of tapes of the calls that people made to 911 on that day will not
be released at all because the Court said they would invade the privacy of the surviving families - even though surviving
family members indicated to the Court that they waived such rights to privacy.
There is one higher court in New York that this decision could be appealed to, the Court of Appeals, but I have seen no
reports on whether the New York Times plans on appealing it. These same records will not even make it to the 9-11 Commission
without deletions.
So much for justice for all! But the testimonies, the evidence and the truth are still there. All you have to do is search
for them!
CONCLUSION
I understand that all this proof will only spawn more questions…
Why was this done?
Who was behind it?
What about the terrorists?
But alas, with my approach of leaving no stone unturned, the answers to these questions deserve posts of their own...
