Here is the first part of my investigation as to the WTC 7 buildings. Please read the whole 'What really happened' postings as well to see the heat signatures in WTC 1, 2 and7. There were probably explosions in the basements that led to their collapse. This would have to be planted bombs before the collapse of these buildings. Remember that no plane hit WTC 7 so they had to "Pull It" to get it down, probably to destroy the evidence of the planted bombs. There would have been an investigation of WTC 7 if it was still standing and no time to remove the evidence, so cock and bull stories were quickly concocted.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/cutter.html
Larry Silverstein, the controller of the destroyed WTC complex, stated plainly in a PBS documentary that he and the FDNY decided jointly to demolish the Solomon Bros. building, or WTC 7, late in the afternoon of Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001.
In the documentary "America Rebuilds", aired September 2002, Silverstein makes the following statement;
"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse." [wmv download]
In the same program a cleanup worker referred to the demolition of WTC 6: "... we're getting ready to pull the building six." [mp3 download]
There can be little doubt as to how the word "pull" is being used in this context.
Molten steel was found ““three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed [from WTCs 1 & 2],”” Loizeaux said. He said molten steel was also found at 7 WTC, which collapsed mysteriously in the late afternoon. [American Free Press]
Molten steel is a by-product of a
thermite reaction.
In perfect conditions the maximum temperature that can be reached by hydrocarbons such as jet fuel burning in air is 1520°̊ F (825°̊ C). When the World Trade Center collapsed the deeply buried fires would have been deprived of oxygen and their temperatures would have significantly decreased.
Why was the temperature at the core of "the pile" nearly 500°̊ F hotter than the maximum burning temperature of jet fuel a full five days after the collapses? There were no infernos in either of the twin towers before they collapsed, so what caused the hot spots deep in their wreckage?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/thermite.htm
"Anyone who has ever watched a building being demolished on purpose knows that if you're going to do this you have to get at the under-infrastructure of the building to bring it down"
Peter Jennings, ABC News 9/11/2001.
Thermite Reaction- Description: Iron oxide reacts with aluminum to produce molten iron. A: The reaction is initiated by the heat from a sparkler which is placed in the iron oxide/aluminum mixture B: The reaction is initiated by the heat from glycerin plus potassium permanganate.
Dr. Frank Gayle, Metals Expert, on the jet fuel fires which burned in the WTC buildings:
"Your gut reaction would be the jet fuel is what made the fire so very intense, a lot of people figured that's what melted the steel. Indeed it didn't, the steel did not melt." [Firehouse.com]
Molten steel did not exist in the WTC buildings prior to the collapses, but...
Molten steel was found ““three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed [from WTCs 1 & 2],”” Loizeaux said. He said molten steel was also found at 7 WTC, which collapsed mysteriously in the late afternoon. [American Free Press]
Consider the facts:
--The fires in WTC 7 were not evenly distributed, so a perfect collapse was impossible.
--Firemen anticipated the building's collapse (even though fire had never brought down a fire-protected steel building prior to 9/11).
--Silverstein said of the building "the smartest thing to do is
pull it."
--WTC 7 subsequently collapsed perfectly into its footprint at freefall speed.
--Molten steel and partially evaporated steel members were found in the debris.
When you add to the above the fact that Madrid's Windsor Building remained standing after an 18+ hour 800°C fire there can be only one conclusion as to what happened to WTC 7: it was demolished.
The fires in WTC 7 were supposedly started by the collapse of WTC 1 meaning there would have been no time to rig the building for demolition on 9/11, therefore this had to have been done whilst the building was still occupied prior to 9/11.
Doesn't this strike you as an odd and dangerous thing to do? If there were no terrorist attacks on 9/11 then a disgruntled employee could have brought down WTC 7 simply by thumping a red button - it makes no sense whatsoever
There had to be a very good reason for this building to be rigged for demolition whilst it was still occupied. Did Silverstein, the new WTC owner who wisely invested in insurance against terrorism, have prior knowledge of the attacks?
The SEC has not quantified the number of active cases in which substantial files were destroyed [in the collapse of WTC 7]. Reuters news service and the Los Angeles Times published reports estimating them at 3,000 to 4,000. They include the agency's major inquiry into the manner in which investment banks divvied up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high-tech boom. ..."Ongoing investigations at the New York SEC will be dramatically affected because so much of their work is paper-intensive," said Max Berger of New York's Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann. "This is a disaster for these cases." [New York Lawyer]
Citigroup says some information that the committee is seeking [about WorldCom] was destroyed in the Sept. 11 terror attack on the World Trade Center. Salomon had offices in 7 World Trade Center, one of the buildings that collapsed in the aftermath of the attack. The bank says that back-up tapes of corporate emails from September 1998 through December 2000 were stored at the building and destroyed in the attack. [TheStreet]
Inside [WTC 7 was] the US Secret Service's largest field office with more than 200 employees. ..."All the evidence that we stored at 7 World Trade, in all our cases, went down with the building," according to US Secret Service Special Agent David Curran. [TechTV]
One other thing, insurance payments from WTC 7's collapse profited Silverstein Properties to the tune of ~$500 million.
WTC INFO
Project information- Owner/ Developer- Silverstein Properties
Larry Silverstein- President and CEO
John(Janno) N. Lieber- Senior V.P.- Project Director
David Worsley- Director Of Construction
Landowner
Port Authority of New York and New jersey
Joseph J. Seymour- Executive Director
Anthony R. Coscia- Chairman
Planning for WTC Site and Lower Manhatten Redevelopment
Lower Manhatten Development Corporation
John C. Whitehead- Chairman
Stefan Pryor- President
This is from a German paper, so should be taken with a grain of salt. I will try to stick to the facts and leave out the rhetoric. You can read the whole article your self.I found it a little to searching and biblical implications insulting for my tastes.
http://globalfire.tv/nj/03en/jews/wtc-silverstein.htm
The Harbor Authorities of New York and New Jersey were the owners of the WTC. The two towers, 412 meters high, were completed in 1972 and the costs then amounted to 37 million Dollars. ... Since then the towers have become a desirable address for corporate businesses. From the completion of the buildings the entire office space had always been rented and the rents produced a great return for the owners. ... 430 companies from all over the world rented app. 3.3 million square feet office space in the WTC. More than 40,000 people were employed in the towers." --Die Welt, Berlin, Sep 11, 2001
Three months prior to the destruction of both towers the owners of the WTC leased the buildings, for incomprehensible reasons, to the Jewish real estate tycoon Larry Silverstein. Since then "Silverstein Properties Inc." took in the rent from the 430 tenants and other source income (i.e. tourist admission fees). Silverstein in return paid a leasing fee to the owners: "Only three months before the attack Silverstein signed a rental contract for the WTC. Silverstein agreed to pay over 99 years a total of 3,2 billion Dollars in leasing installments to the Port Authorities: 616 million as an initial payment and then annually 115 million Dollars. The Port Authorities remained the owners of the WTC." --Die Welt, Berlin, Oct 11, 2001.
Then the catastrophe came upon New York. On September 11, only three months after signing the lease between Silverstein and the Port Authorities, two large passenger jets crashed into the towers. Larry was lucky, that he was not responsible for liabilities towards the Port Authorities, since the disaster was an act of God. Quite the contrary happened. Larry Silverstein, despite not being the owner of the buildings, was the sole beneficiary of the insurance indemnity payments of more than 7 billion Dollars. Good for Larry that he had not forgotten to increase the insurance policies, just in time, when he signed the lease three months before the catastrophe happened: "Larry Silverstein, since July landlord of the towers, demands from the insurers 7,2 billion Dollars compensation, his speaker, Steve Solomon, said. ... The Port Authorities of New York and New Jersey, owners of the WTC, agree with Silverstein's demand." --Die Welt, Berlin,
The Port Authorities believe that Silverstein should get the 7,2 billion Dollar compensation instead of them, despite the fact that, as the lawful owners, should be indemified. Larry, born under a lucky star.
The following insurance companies are liable to Silverstein's compensation demand: "Chubb Corp., Swiss Reinsurance Co., Lloyd's of London, German Alliance Corp., ACE Ltd and XL Capital Ltd." --Die Welt, Berlin, Oct 10, 2001.
http://proliberty.com/observer/20050510.htm
From the May 2005 Idaho Observer:
Shareholder challenges "Lucky Larry’s" $7.2 billion Twin Tower insurance claim
by Greg Szymanski
A shareholder has filed a grievance against one of the world’s largest insurers, charging company bigwigs with failing to investigate possible insurance fraud in relation to a $7.2 billion pay out being litigated over the 9/11 attacks.
John Leonard of California claims management of the Allianz Group, a German-based company carrying a significant portion of the insurance coverage on the WTC, relied on faulty government 9/11 reports and then negligently failed to mount any significant fraud investigation to protect stockholder interests against future excessive pay outs.
"The managing and supervisory boards have taken a passive attitude toward the insurance claims and the suspicious aspects of the WTC insurance loss," said Leonard, whose grievance was to be heard at a May 4 stockholders’ meeting. No official word from the company has yet been released.
He added, "The WTC catastrophe was doubtless one of the biggest insurance incidents in history. The investigation of insurance losses and insurance damage claims against the company is naturally one of the chief duties of the management of every insurance firm. The suspicious irregularities of the WTC attacks just have not been addressed."
After the attack, Silverstein Properties and Westfield America, the partnership who leased the WTC just months prior to the attacks, commenced litigation against its insurers, including Allianz—one of the major policy holders.
Leading partner, Larry Silverstein, boldly asserted he was entitled to twice the insurance policy value because, according to a spokesman for Mr. Silverstein:
"The two hijacked airliners that struck the 110-story twin towers Sept. 11 were separate ‘occurrences’ for insurance purposes, entitling him to collect twice on $3.6 billion collective worth of the policies."
The ensuing legal battle between the insurers and leaseholders then began one month after the attacks, ending with a favorable ruling for Silverstein by U.S. District Judge John S. Martin in December 2004. The judge, by agreeing with Silverstein that the two planes that hit the WTC were actually two separate occurrences for insurance purposes, actually doubled Silverstein’s possible future recovery from $3.6 billion to $7.2 billion.
The case is now on appeal and in order to protect any adverse ruling against Allianz, Leonard has attempted to instigate management to initiate fraud investigations with his shareholder grievance.
In his proposal, the California native and a publisher of books on 9/11, pointed to reports that building WTC 7 apparently collapsed by demolition unrelated to the 9/11 attacks as well as many other irregularities.
"Numerous observers and researchers find the
WTC case very suspicious. For example, in a public opinion survey, 49.3% of respondents in New York City agreed that ‘some of our leaders knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act," wrote Leonard in his grievance.
"When this belief is so widespread among unrelated parties, haven’t the
affected insurance companies ever asked whether perhaps the U.S. Government instead of the insurers is responsible for the damages, or whether the possibility of insurance fraud has been investigated?
"From reports in the media about the trial in New York between the insurers and the insured WTC leaseholder, no sign of such motions has been made public. The dispute has been
mainly over the question, whether to pay out $7 billion or only $3 billion, whereby the shareholders are supposed to be relieved at the latter sum as a victory of the lesser of two evils."
In his shareholder grievance, Leonard lastly called management to pay strict attention to the strange collapse of WTC Building No. 7.
WTC-7, as is well-known, was
never struck by airplanes, and photographs of it show
only insignificant fires. Nevertheless, the 47-story building at WTC 7 suddenly collapsed at around 5:28 p.m. on 9/11.
This fact, however, was not even mentioned in the report of the official 9/11 commission."
Besides the enormity of the possible insurance pay outs, independent 9/11 investigators have also
called attention to the peculiar timing and control of ownership made by Silverstein only months before the WTC attacks.
The WTC came under the control of a private ownership of Silverstein for the first time on April 26, 2001, having been built and managed by the New York and New Jersey Port Authority as a public resource since its creation in 1972.
Silverstein then acquired a handsome insurance policy for the complex,
including a clause that would prove extremely valuable in the not too distant future. The clause specifically read that "in the event of a terrorist attack, the partnership could collect the insured value of the property, and be released from their obligations under the 99-year lease."
Don Paul, in his 2002 book that investigated the nature of the Silverstein transaction, provided some interesting background information highlighting the incredible deal and low bidding price the new owner was able to negotiate with friendly New York government officials.
"Silverstein’s winning bid was $3.2 billion for holdings estimated to be worth more than $8 billion. JP Morgan Chase, a prestigious investment-bank that’s the flagship firm of its kind for Rockefeller family interests, advised the Port Authority, another body long influenced by banker and builder David Rockefeller, his age then 85, in the negotiations," Paul wrote.
"The lead partner and spokesperson for the winning bidders, Larry Silverstein, age 70,
already controlled more than 8 million square feet of New York City real estate. WTC 7 and the nearby Equitable Building were prime among these prior holdings. Silverstein also owned Runway 69, a nightclub in Queens that was alleged 9 years ago to be laundering money made through sales of Laotian heroin."
The lease deal on the WTC finally was transferred to Silverstein, officially closing on July 24, 2001, just 6 weeks prior to the 9/11 attacks. It is estimated that Silverstein Properties could walk away from the WTC disaster with a $2 billion net.
This kind of crooked thievery is a definite incentive to all those little Neo-Con repiglican wanna bes (Like Bucky, tgen etc) to want to believe that the lord truly is their shepard and as potential sheepherders they can fleece the flocks of "sinners" with their g.OD's permission. Scary cultists.
http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/09/WTC_Silverstein.html
Los Angeles, Alta California - September 16, 2001 (ACN) A Jewish Real Estate Magnate won a coveted 99 year lease on the World Trade Center from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey less than two months before they were leveled to the ground by terrorists. Larry Silverstein is a wheeler and dealer of downtown New York skyscrapers and owns a large real estate portfolio including 1 World Trade Center and the infamous "Runway 69" Queens dance club that has been tied to the heroin trade, money laundering and New York Police corruption.
Silverstein, past president of the United Jewish Appeal in New York, received a very sweet deal for the World Trade Center from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. He received the 99 year lease worth $8 billion for a mere $3.2 billion. Silverstein has immense influence over politicians and government bureaucrats and this has helped him and his friends take control of coveted real estate in Manhattan.
It is estimated that about 5,000 workers died when the city's tallest structures collapsed after being hit by two passenger jet airlines commandeered by terrorists. Silverstein wants to start rebuilding the structures according to Steve Solomon, his spokesman, however four employees of Silverstein's company who worked in the firm's management office on the 88th floor of the tower known as 1 World Trade Center have not been accounted for.
Seems that Silverstein has a history of unconstrained uncompassionate acts that go back a long way. He must have friends in high places, as he can get away with anything, it seems. Case in point- Clinton and Powell are defendants at a secret trial.
In July 1993, Harry P. Miller, a Vietnam veteran, filed a complaint in a federal district court of New York against Larry Silverstein, the owner of "Runway 69," a Queens dance club, that
included as defendants President Clinton and Colin Powell. The allegations of Miller's complaint were that the named defendants committed or aided others in committing illegal acts, including assassinations, over a twenty-five year period, beginning amidst the Vietnam War, in furtherance of a conspiracy to distribute Laotian heroin. He asserted that the defendants were engaged in heroin trafficking and that "Goldfingers International," a business that supplies nude dancers to nude dance clubs, was laundering the proceeds of the conspiracy through "Runway 69." Miller alleged that the proceeds were used for such purposes as covering up the "political scandals" and buying the "cooperation" of the NYC Police Department.
In April 1993, Miller commenced his action in state court. The action was subsequently removed to the district court and in July 1993, Miller filed an amended complaint, which incorporates his first complaint.
Based on his allegations, Miller asked for $49 million in damages as well as a myriad of court orders, such as one providing that "no President or officer of the United States of America has ever been authorized to order the death of any person without due process of war or law" and that "no executive order of the President can provide due process for assassinations."
In January 1994, all of the defendants moved to dismiss Miller's complaint. In a 28-page order, the court granted each of the defendants' motions and dismissed all of Miller's claims pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b) however Miller appealed to the United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. On September 9, 1997 in case No. 96-6303 Judge Edward R. Korman, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of New York affirmed the lower court's decision and the entire case was buried. The case was never reported in the mainstream media and a host of questions still remain unanswered.
Seems the WTC is A smoking gun, but not THE smoking gun, and needs to be reopened. It is only one of many and my next post is to shed some light on some slipups by the administration and other incidents that don't fit in. Have to get going. Must work on a vehicle as I can't afford the costs of others doing the work and ripping me off. A '78 Mercedes I'm trying to restore is almost completed and I have to do some welding to get it safetied before the end of the year. Will talk later.
Oh and Durango, how about letting us know what side of the fence you're leaning on. Why this need for information. What's your agenda? Not that I'm paranoid, but it would be nice to know. What is it you know and are holding back. Share your knowledge please, not in snippets please. We've been through most of this info already here at TVNL.
how old was the building? how well structured was the building?
