[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
9/11 See other 9/11 Articles Title: John Kerry: Building 7 Was Deliberately Demolished, Massachusetts Senator's conclusion directly contradicts 9/11 official story, multi-billion dollar insurance lawsuit (YouTube included) 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.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 2.
#2. To: christine (#0)
There are no replies to Comment # 2. End Trace Mode for Comment # 2.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||