Building 7 lease holder on the phone with insurance companies at the time of 9/11!

Posted: April 24, 2010 in Conspiracy Theory, Current Events, News
Tags: , , , , , ,

Anyone with any lick of sense or an I.Q. can tell you that a controlled demolition has to take weeks to plan.  There are many variables involved: the building size, the way its going to fall, and the buildings around it.  I am sure that there are other things that I am missing at the moment.  The basic point is that the controlled demolition that happened in the scorcher blockbuster Volcano with Tommy Lee Jones that took fifteen minutes to plan just does not exist.

Federal agencies and media have told us that building 7 fell due to collateral damage.  But as you will see, a man close to Larry Silverstein says that he was on the phone with the insurance companies moment before the implosion to see if they would authorize a controlled demolition of the building.

This implies many things: planning, as I have pointed out of a controlled demolition cannot be done in fifteen minutes, it takes weeks to plan, and premeditation.  This means one of two things: either they knew of the impending attacks and wanted to cash in on them, or they (the government) planned the thing from beginning to end.  Remember Project for a New American Century (PNAC) called for military action in the Middle East long before 9/11 and said that it would not be possible without a “cataclysmic event like a new Pearl Harbor”.

Either way the Bush administration, Silverstein, and anyone else involved should be tried for treason and murder.

“Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.”

Here is an introduction by Alex Jones, the father of 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Preface from Alex Jones: To truly grasp the magnitude of this story, you really have to read the entire article. Immediately after the “pull it” controversy, debunkers claimed there was no plan to conduct a controlled demolition of the building. Now the fact that officials were considering blowing up the building is established, Silverstein’s consistent denial that this took place is a huge smoking gun. How did Silverstein expect to demolish the building safely when such a process takes weeks or even months to properly set up, even without the additional chaos surrounding WTC 7 on 9/11? How could explosives have been correctly placed on such short notice inside a burning building that had already been evacuated – unless the explosives were already in place? This new revelation is astounding and it needs to be investigated immediately.

Click here for the news article: http://www.prisonplanet.com/bombshell-silverstein-wanted-to-demolish-building-7-on-911.html

You can read this article as well: http://www.prisonplanet.com/silverstein-was-calling-lawyero-get-double-insurance-on-wtc-on-the-evening-of-911s-t.html

Advertisements
Comments
  1. patricksmcnally says:

    Unfortunately, this does not have any of the implications which Watson has tried to trump it up as having.

    “Larry Silverstein, who collected nearly $500 million dollars in insurance as a result of the collapse of Building 7, a 47-story structure that was not hit by a plane but collapsed within seven seconds on September 11, was on the phone to his insurance carrier attempting to convince them that the building should be brought down via controlled demolition.”

    Nothing odd about that. It was clear from the reports of firefighters that, if the building did not actually collapse, it would be in such a condition that would render it unsafe for usage. In such a case, the eventual taking down of the building is a natural step to take. But this can pose questions about insurance.

    If a building remains standing but in a totally unsafe and unusable condition, what is the responsibility of the insurance? Should they be obligated to pay for the costs of replacing the building in the event that the building owner orders it to be torn down? Or can they plead that any damage to the building’s structure which they pay for must not have been inflicted in any way by the insurance client, even when it’s clear that the building will have to be replaced completely?

    Nothing about this report does in the least bit suggest that Silverstein had any plans made for bringing the building down that afternoon. He is merely asking about what would be the responsibility of the insurance coverage in the event that the building was torn down, say, in the next two weeks, because professional firemen said that one could not expect that the building would be left in a safe condition. Nowhere does this report indicate that Silverstein was ready to plant demolition charges and take the building down that afternoon. That’s just truthers misreading things again, for the umpteenth time.

    The one valid point is that this is similar to the whole “pull it” fumble, but not in the sense that Watson tried to imply. Truthers made fools of themselves over that “pull it” bit, and it seems like they’re going to do the same thing here too with this one.

  2. waylon1776 says:

    The fact that people cannot grasp that no plane hit the building 7 and yet fell in free fall speed and no other buildings besides the WTC complex fell is beyond me. Building 7 sat about three-hundred feet to the south, received superficial damage, and yet was able to collapse in its own footprint.

    I ask the question, why didn’t other buildings fall? Like say the ones across the street? The World Trade Center complex was one of the most technologically advanced structures in our time. I have seen photographs and videos of large chunks of steel jutting out of these buildings. Why didn’t they fall? If the damage was so catastrophic to WTC 7 to make it fall, why not others?

    Word Trade Center’s 3, 4, 5, 6, all of which sat under the Twin Towers had to be destroyed by demolition. After 9/11 Larry Silverstein made over $1 trillion off of the loss of the WTC complex.

    I’m sorry, but the whole two planes brought down two buildings and one by collateral damage, whilst no other buildings fell due to collateral damage just doesn’t work for me.

    Months after 9/11 my dad (God rest his soul) told me that they had found molten metal in the wreckage of the towers, and at the time we all could not figure out how jet fuel could keep burning that long. The fact is, is that it can’t. Jet fuel is comprised partly of kerosene, and as we all know, kerosene burns off quickly and cannot leave molten metal in its wake.

    After doing some research I found that the only chemical in the world that can do such a thing is thermite. NASA actually has photos of the WTC complex at the time and shows thermal images of hot spots a lengthy amount of time after the event.

    If there wasn’t something behind this. then why did the 9/11 victims families start asking questions? Why are there New York City firefighters pressing for more questions to be answered? George W. Bush hedged on the 9/11 Commission investigation because he wanted to keep things shut, and to this day it still remains one of the shittiest, poorest funded investigations in American history.

    Why was George W. Bush and Dick Cheney questioned behind closed doors with no verbatim, no media, and were not sworn in under oath?

    Now I know that I have gone off the original course, and there are people that live, eat, and sleep 9/11, and there are those who would like to leave the facts as they be, but I smell a rat.

    Larry Silverstein is a 9/11 profiteer and him suing his insurance company for each plane representing a seperate terrorist attack just so he can make his wallet a little fatter is proof of it. Now I am not wanting to say that he was part of a “grand conspiracy”, but Silverstein stood to gain much profit if the WTC complex was destroyed by a terrorist attack.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s