[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

9/11
See other 9/11 Articles

Title: Duh, Gee Chumley, a building collapse in NYC that doesn't resemble 911's
Source: -
URL Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkvZcU_l6wc
Published: Jun 13, 2013
Author: -
Post Date: 2013-06-13 10:33:13 by Katniss
Keywords: None
Views: 222
Comments: 15

Sounds familiar ...

But it doesn't look familiar ... where are all the upward and outward explosive clouds in this one?

Ah well, just another day in emotional fantasyland for most of the nation.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 15.

#15. To: Katniss (#0)

Ah well, just another day in emotional fantasyland for most of the nation.

Something I've stumbled upon...

excerpt

Silverstein's prospective 17-billion-dollar payoff on a 14-million-dollar down payment might qualify as the world's best-ever investment. But had 9/11 not occurred, Silverstein's purchase of the World Trade Center could have qualified as the world's worst-ever investment. According to Trade Center plans, 5,000 tons of asbestos were going to be used in the Twin Towers, [xii] much of that total was actually used, and estimates of the amount that remained in the Towers on 9/11 range from 400 to 2000 tons.[xiii] On May 14th, 2001, Business Insurance magazine reported that the Port Authority had just lost a $600 million asbestos abatement lawsuit against its insurers.[xiv] Given that the Twin Towers were reputed to be money-hemorrhaging white elephants plagued not just with asbestos, but also with low vacancy rates due to their lacking any modern communications infrastructure, and that the Port Authority had reportedly been trying to find a way to demolish them but was prevented from doing so by the asbestos problem,[xv] Larry Silverstein's decision to take out a 99-year-lease on the World Trade Center makes very little sense unless he somehow knew they were slated for quick extra-legal demolition.

When someone buys a dubious, asbestos-ridden property, doubles the insurance policy, and sees the property destroyed by fire and/or explosives six weeks later, an arson investigation normally follows. If the person of interest were to publicly confess to participating in the intentional destruction of said property, one would expect not only an investigation, but also a swift indictment, prosecution, and conviction.

Why hasn't Larry Silverstein even been investigated? Was Israel Involved?

"Lucky Larry" Silverstein just happens to be a close personal friend of Benyamin Netanyahu, the radical Zionist Likudnik Israeli leader who invented the "war on terror" back in 1979, and who is on record publicly celebrating the 9/11 attacks.[xvi]

http://www.real-debt-elimination.com/real_freedom/Propaganda/false_flag_attacks/9-11/WTC-owner_Silverstein_never_charged_for_arson.htm

Money talks, tower falls.

SilverStorm  posted on  2013-06-14   3:44:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 15.

        There are no replies to Comment # 15.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 15.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]