Massachusetts Senator's conclusion directly contradicts 9/11 official story, multi-billion dollar insurance lawsuit
Prison Planet | April 23, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson & Aaron Dykes
At a recent speaking engagement in Austin Texas, Senator John Kerry responded to a question about WTC Building 7 by concluding that according to his information, the building was brought down as a result of a controlled demolition, directly contradicting the official line that the structure fell as a result of fire and debris damage.
WTC Building 7 was a 47-story building in the WTC complex that collapsed at 5:20pm on September 11. The building had been structurally reinforced and was not hit by a plane yet collapsed in a uniform implosion within its own footprint in a matter of seconds after sustaining relatively light debris and fire damage following the collapse of the twin towers.
News networks like BBC and CNN were reporting that the building had collapsed before it fell, indicating that the media were being handed a script of events that had yet to even unfold.
Ground zero EMT's, firefighters and police were all told hours in advance to clear a collapse zone for Building 7 as it was going to be "brought down."
Questioned on WTC 7 by members of Austin 9/11 Truth Now at a Book People event in Austin Texas, Kerry responded, "I do know that that wall, I remember, was in danger and I think they made the decision based on the danger that it had in destroying other things, that they did it in a controlled fashion."
Kerry is basically saying that the building was intentionally demolished to prevent a random collapse from damaging nearby buildings, but that premise has never been explicitly admitted, with officials clinging to the notion that the collapse was expected but was not aided by means of explosive charges, because to admit to a controlled demolition would be to expose foreknowledge of 9/11 itself.
Whether Kerry is basing his response on inside knowledge or hearsay is largely irrelevant, the fact that a sitting United States Senator is openly contradicting the official 9/11 story as well as a multi-billion dollar insurance lawsuit strikes at the root of the controversy surrounding Building 7.
In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. This building's collapse alone resulted in a payout of nearly $500 million, based on the contention that it was an accidental event caused by the fall of the twin towers.
EMT's, firefighters and first responders all knew the building was pulled, anyone with an ounce of common sense can watch the videos and understand that building's don't commit suicide - and yet Silverstein, the government, and their propaganda arm Popular Mechanics, are wedded to the myth that the structure fell as a result of fire damage. They are beholden to this explanation because any revision on their behalf would undermine the entire sequence of events on 9/11 and call into question other aspects of the official story.
Their credibility rests on sweeping the issue of WTC 7 under the rug, which makes it our responsibility to keep beating the Building 7 drum.
Official reports from both NIST and FEMA state that they cannot explain why Building 7 fell, but maintain that it was related to a terrorist attack on the complex on 9/11. However, the FEMA report concludes that, "The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. The best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue."
NIST is currently undertaking a study of WTC 7 to determine if bombs or incendiary devices were used to bring down the building.
Controlled demolitions expert Danny Jowenko was shown footage and building schematics of Building 7 by Dutch television and immediately concluded that its collapse was a result of deliberately placed explosives.
Preparing to demolish even a moderate sized building takes weeks of preparation. A building as large as WTC 7, a 47-story skyscraper, must have taken at least as long. Therefore, the idea that the building was demolished in response to fires spread from the twin towers is not a satisfactory response, as the building could not have been set up for unexpected demolition in only a few hours, much less while fires burned inside. All personnel were withdrawn from the area very early, meaning the explosives which can clearly be seen in the videos were placed days or weeks before 9/11.
Kerry was also asked about the research of Dr. Steven Jones, who has tested both samples of steel from the twin towers as well as recovered dust, which have both tested positive for the chemical signature of Thermate, which is used to cut support beams in localized reactions during a controlled demolition.
Kerry stated that he was not aware of the research and is "open to hearing anything based in fact and evidence."
Since John Kerry is a fellow Skull and Bones member with President Bush, allied to the fact that he took a dive despite massive evidence of vote fraud during the 2004 election, we won't hold our breath on the possibility of Kerry being a torch bearer for a new investigation into 9/11, but his conclusion that WTC 7 was deliberately demolished adds substantial weight to a 9/11 enigma that officials are terrified will reach critical mass.
Agreement Tentatively Made for Steven Jones to Discuss Towers, WTC 7 Collapse
Prison Planet | April 5, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson
Physicist Professor Steven Jones has confirmed that Rosie O'Donnell's staff have contacted him regarding a potential future appearance on The View to discuss the improbable collapse of the twin towers and WTC 7.
During a debate on The View, O'Donnell promised to feature a physicist as a guest on the show to discuss the physical evidence and the impossibility of jet fuel melting steel.
"A person from Rosie's team contacted me by E mail," Professor Jones told the Alex Jones Show, "so I wrote back to them and said I would be glad to appear and I named two other physicists who I trust who could also appear."
Jones said that Rosie's representatives need to get "permission" from ABC before the segment can be scheduled so the appearance is still tentative, but it is something that we might see when O'Donnell returns from vacation in around 10 days.
There are a couple of other potential developments that will strike a blow for 9/11 truth but we cannot reveal their exact nature so as to not compromise the chance of them actually unfolding.
One thing we can say for sure is that this entire story is not going away anytime soon.
