informationliberation
The news you're not supposed to know...




An Introduction to Austrian Economics: Understand Economics, Understand Everything
The Century of the Self: The Untold History of Controlling the Masses Through the Manipulation of Unconscious Desires
The Disappearing Male: From Virility to Sterility

The Obama Deception: The Mask Comes Off
Operation Gladio: The Hidden History of U.S. Sponsored False Flag Terrorism in EuropeThe New American Century: The Untold History of The Project for the New American Century
(more)
Analysis posted Apr 23 2010, 9:19 AM Category: Cover-Up/Deceptions Source: Prison Planet Print

EPIC FAIL: Fox News hit piece against 9/11 truth and Jesse Ventura inadvertently reveals a shocking truth; WTC leaseholder was "on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building"

Silverstein Wanted To Demolish Building 7 On 9/11
Paul Joseph Watson


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.A Fox News hit piece against Jesse Ventura and the 9/11 truth movement written by former Washington D.C. prosecutor Jeffrey Scott Shapiro inadvertently reveals a shocking truth, that World Trade Center leaseholder 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.

Writing for Fox News, Jeffrey Scott Shapiro states, “I was working as a journalist for Gannett News at Ground Zero that day, and I remember very clearly what I saw and heard.”

“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.”

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 unforeseen accidental event.

“A controlled demolition would have minimized the damage caused by the building's imminent collapse and potentially save lives. Many law enforcement personnel, firefighters and other journalists were aware of this possible option. There was no secret. There was no conspiracy,” writes Shapiro.

However, obviously aware of how it would impact his insurance claim, Larry Silverstein has consistently denied that there was ever a plan to intentionally demolish Building 7.

In June 2005, Silverstein told New York Post journalist Sam Smith that his infamous “pull it” comment, which has been cited as proof that Silverstein planned to take down the building with explosives, “meant something else”.

In January 2006, Silverstein’s spokesperson Dara McQuillan told the U.S. State Department that the “pull it” comment meant to withdraw firefighters from the building (despite the fact that there were no firefighters inside WTC 7 as we shall later cover). There was no mention whatsoever of any plan to demolish the building before it fell.

Shapiro’s faux pas has unwittingly let the cat out of the bag on the fact that Silverstein was aggressively pushing for the building to be intentionally demolished, a claim that he has always vociferously denied, presumably to safeguard against putting in doubt the massive insurance payout he received on the basis that the collapse was accidental.

For over five years since the infamous PBS documentary was aired in which Silverstein states that the decision was made to “pull” the building, a construction term for controlled demolition, debunkers have attempted to perform all kinds of mental gymnastics in fudging the meaning behind the WTC leaseholder’s comments.

“I remember getting a call from the 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,” said Silverstein.

Debunkers attempted to claim that Silverstein meant to “pull” the firefighters from the building due to the danger the structure was in, and this explanation was also later claimed by Silverstein’s spokesman, however, both the FEMA report, the New York Times and even Popular Mechanics reported that there were no firefighting actions taken inside WTC 7.



Another clip from the same documentary clearly illustrates that the term “pull” is industry jargon for a controlled demolition.



“While I was talking with a fellow reporter and several NYPD officers, Building 7 suddenly collapsed, and before it hit the ground, not a single sound emanated from the tower area. There were no explosives; I would have heard them. In fact, I remember that in those few seconds, as the building sank to the ground that I was stunned by how quiet it was,” writes Shapiro in his Fox News hit piece.

Shapiro’s contention that the 47-story building simply collapsed into its own footprint within seven seconds without making a sound, a feat only ever witnessed in world history on 9/11 alone, is contradicted by numerous other first-hand eyewitnesses.

Contradicting Shapiro’s claim that the collapse of the building was quiet, NYPD officer Craig Bartmer stated that he clearly heard bombs tear down Building 7 as he ran away from its collapse.

“I walked around it (Building 7). I saw a hole. I didn’t see a hole bad enough to knock a building down, though. Yeah there was definitely fire in the building, but I didn’t hear any… I didn’t hear any creaking, or… I didn’t hear any indication that it was going to come down. And all of a sudden the radios exploded and everyone started screaming ‘get away, get away, get away from it!’… It was at that moment… I looked up, and it was nothing I would ever imagine seeing in my life. The thing started pealing in on itself… Somebody grabbed my shoulder and I started running, and the shit’s hitting the ground behind me, and the whole time you’re hearing “boom, boom, boom, boom, boom.” I think I know an explosion when I hear it… Yeah it had some damage to it, but nothing like what they’re saying… Nothing to account for what we saw… I am shocked at the story we’ve heard about it to be quite honest,” said Bartmer.

EMT Indira Singh, a Senior Consultant for JP Morgan Chase in Information Technology and Risk Management, told the Pacifica show Guns and Butter, “After midday on 9/11 we had to evacuate that because they told us Building 7 was coming down. If you had been there, not being able to see very much just flames everywhere and smoke – it is entirely possible – I do believe that they brought Building 7 down because I heard that they were going to bring it down because it was unstable because of the collateral damage.”

The host asked Singh, “Did they actually use the word “brought down” and who was it that was telling you this?,” to which Singh responded, “The fire department. And they did use the words ‘we’re gonna have to bring it down’ and for us there observing the nature of the devastation it made total sense to us that this was indeed a possibility, given the subsequent controversy over it I don’t know.”

Another EMT named Mike who wished to remain anonymous wrote in a letter to the Loose Change film crew that emergency responders were told Building 7 was about to be “pulled” and that a 20 second radio countdown preceded its collapse.

“There were bright flashes up and down the sides of Building 7, you could see them through the windows…and it collapsed. We all knew it was intentionally pulled… they told us,” he stated.

Following news reports in the days after the attack that Building 7 had collapsed due to fire damage, Mike fully expected this mistake to be corrected after the chaos had subsided, but was astonished when it became part of the official story.

Mike’s report of a countdown preceding the collapse of WTC 7 was backed up by Former Air Force Special Operations for Search and Rescue, Kevin McPadden, who said that he heard the last few seconds of the countdown on a nearby police radio.

In addition, the language used by firefighters and others at ground zero shortly before the building fell strongly indicates that the building was deliberately demolished with explosives, and not that it fell unaided.



“It’s blowin’ boy.” … “Keep your eye on that building, it’ll be coming down soon.” … “The building is about to blow up, move it back.” … “Here we are walking back. There’s a building, about to blow up…”

Photo and video evidence of the collapse of Building 7 shows classic indications of a controlled demolition. The standard ‘crimp’ in the center-left top of the building and the subsequent ’squibs’ of smoke as it collapses clearly represent explosive demolition.

Veteran news anchor Dan Rather shared the view that the building looked like a controlled demolition during news coverage of the event on CBS.



Several news agencies, including the BBC and CNN, reported that the building had already collapsed 26 minutes and as much as over an hour before it actually fell.

Footage broadcast 20 minutes before Building 7 fell shows BBC reporter Jane Standley talking about the collapse of WTC 7 while it remains standing in the live shot behind her head. A Separate BBC broadcast shows reporters discussing the collapse of Building 7 26 minutes before it happened.



Just about every sentence of Shapiro’s hit piece is contradicted by numerous other eyewitnesses, so his feigned righteous indignation in ranting, “I was there. I know what happened, and there is no single credible piece of evidence that implicates the United States of America in the Sept. 11 attacks,” fails to ring true.

However, the most damning aspect of the article is Shapiro’s inadvertent revelation that Larry Silverstein was on the phone to his insurance company pushing for the building to be demolished, which is precisely what happened later in the day, and as innumerable eyewitnesses as well as video footage and physical evidence prove, the collapse of WTC 7 could have been nothing else than a controlled demolition, which would place Silverstein’s $500 million insurance payout in severe jeopardy if ever acknowledged.

Shapiro’s testimony, intended to debunk questions surrounding the official story behind 9/11, has only succeeded in raising more, because it completely contradicts Larry Silverstein’s insistence that he never considered deliberately demolishing WTC 7 with explosives.

More: Silverstein Was Calling Lawyer To Get Double Insurance On WTC On The Evening Of 9/11

Via email……

In response to your excellent new article, “Bombshell: Silverstein Wanted To Demolish Building 7 On 9/11,” I thought you might find the following of use:

Firstly, you can watch a recent CBS interview in which Silverstein claims that he should have been in the WTC on 9/11, but his wife insisted he go to a dermatologist’s appointment, thereby saving his life:

http://www.cbs.com/primetime/60_minutes/video/?pid=dCJDTFzLiEO_a32xTRfMdMMYQd1nHV1N&play=true

Secondly, it is worth noting that already on the evening of 9/11, Silverstein was calling his lawyers, to see if he could make a double claim on his WTC insurance policy. See this 9/11 Timeline entry:

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a091201doubleinsurance&scale=0

The key information is from pp. 18-19 of Steven Brill’s book, After: How America Confronted the September 12 Era. Brill wrote:

“Real estate developer Larry Silverstein was on his way to a dermatologist on the morning of the 11th, instead of the Trade Center--the multibillion-dollar complex where he had leveraged a $14 million personal investment in a partnership that owned the leasing rights to the buildings into bragging rights as the complex’s putative owner. Silverstein would tell the author five months later that he was so shocked and sickened by the destruction and by the loss of four of his employees that morning that he did not think he focused on issues like insurance or finances until “perhaps two weeks later.” In fact, according to his own lawyers, by that evening he was on the phone with them worrying whether his effort to shave costs when he’d bought insurance would now come back to hurt him, or whether his insurance policies could be read in a way that would construe the attacks as two separate, insurable incidents rather than one. The difference was roughly $3.55 billion versus $7.1 billion--the kind of gap corporate litigators dream of.”

[End of quote]

If you want to verify this quote for yourself, you can search Brill’s book at Amazon.com: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0743237099/

(Just do a search for “Silverstein,” and select the third result from the list.)





Latest Cover-Up/Deceptions
- Media Buries Bombshell Turkey False Flag Attack
- Here Is The YouTube "Start A False Flag War With Syria" Leaked Recording That Erdogan Wanted Banned
- Judge Otis Wright Slams 'Made Up' Government 'Plot' Designed To Ensnare Gullible Poor People
- Silk Road Founder's Mother Speaks Out
- FBI Bust Another Handcrafted 'Terrorist' For The Crime Of Thinking About Supporting A Terrorist Organization
- Jon Stewart's Lying Lincolnites
- "Behind The Kiev Snipers It Was Somebody From The New Coalition" - A Stunning New Leak Released
- "9/11 Was Perpetrated By People Within Our Own Government" - Man Takes Mic During Footballer's Post Super Bowl Interview









Comments 1 - 16 of 16 Add Comment Page 1 of 1
freedom_man

Posted: Apr 23 2010, 9:38 AM

Link
Maybe it's just arrogance that despite having years and years of time to concoct their stories, they only come up with stuff that should get them deeper in trouble - which of course doesn't happen because they are unaccountable.

i don't think this "admission" is inadvertent at all but carefully planned psychological warfare to push people further into cognitive dissonance. The public can't reason for itself, their betters and the media will do the reasoning for them and public just has to suspend their own thoughts and suck it up.
Anonymous

Posted: Apr 23 2010, 9:54 AM

Link
91198 holy crap what an admission! good thing these people are idiots!!!!!!
Anonymous

Posted: Apr 23 2010, 9:58 AM

Link
8194 damn this is pretty huge...
Anonymous

Posted: Apr 23 2010, 10:04 AM

Link
21242 If you google his name this comes up:

'The Bush Restoration Project'
Jeffrey Scott Shapiro is on a mission to rehabilitate the former president's reputation.
April 21
http://www.slate.com/id/2251517/
Chris

Posted: Apr 23 2010, 10:11 AM

Link
It's definitely an inadvertent admission, they have tons of other ways to induce whatever they want people to think. It's clear if you read it this guy was going off script to show off what a good little establishment bootlicker he is, this idiot took things into his own hands and screwed up BIG TIME.
Daisy

Posted: Apr 23 2010, 5:36 PM

Link
94197 I love your quote on reddit. You tell 'em Chris!
Chris

Posted: Apr 23 2010, 5:36 PM

Link
hehe, thx ;)
Anonymous

Posted: Apr 23 2010, 8:45 PM

Link
24217 who the hell cares? this is between the man and his unsurance company. 9/11 was a tragedy, why are we trying to blame other americans?
Anonymous

Posted: Apr 23 2010, 9:21 PM

Link
7190 It's not about blame. It's about truth, and it always has been.
Anonymous

Posted: Apr 24 2010, 3:04 AM

Link
17324 The writer of this article, and truthes, are idiots.
Anonymous

Posted: Apr 24 2010, 3:47 AM

Link
76191 The only thing worse than the people responsible for 911, are the debunkers that call people names, dispute forensic science and blindly defend the potential mass murderers without ever looking at the evidence.
Truther in Mom's Basement

Posted: Apr 24 2010, 9:03 AM

Link
71174 Look at the name of the journalist.. Shapiro ? Clearly a Jew working for the NWO!

Those damn cops and con edison workers should not have been listening in on larry's phone calls at his house though.
TOM

Posted: Apr 24 2010, 9:51 AM

Link
7523 Why hasn't anyone mentioned the fact, that if the building was demolished (which it was...you would have to be a moron to not be able to tell what brought WTC 7 down)...how could they rig it up on 911? How long would it take for them to set explosions up in order to bring it down? There is no way, they could have rigged it up on that same day.

It would take more than one day to get WTC 7 ready to demolish...
Maybe some people knew 911 was going to happen before it did, I know 11 other countries knew, so why is it out of line to think Larry Sliverstein didn't know?

WTC 7 was probably supposed to be hit by one of the planes...please, explain how they were able to outfit it with explosions in time for it to fall that after noon? They had to have been placed there ahead of time.

freedom_man

Posted: Apr 24 2010, 9:53 AM

Link
"Truther": So what if he's jewish? There's plenty of non-jews working for the NWO also. There's even Arabs working for the NWO.

Chris: Well, this comes down to that Silverstein was caught lying - it's not a revelation as by inference it was obvious all the time he's been lying. These people are caught lying all the time, and things go on like nothing happened - at best people confronting them get arrested.
jfkurd_11110

Posted: Apr 24 2010, 11:26 AM

Link
99227 911 happened ,because bankers needed to tie baseless fiat money to a base which is oil,
next financial crisis is coming on OCT 2010, before that they want to invade Iran
why ?
1- distract public mind from real trouble and its source (J Banking practice)
2- complete oil encirclement of middle-east to control BRIC
3- prevent dismissing IOU ($)
freedom_man

Posted: Apr 24 2010, 11:35 AM

Link
Like another commenter said, good comment on reddit, Chris.
Comments 1 - 16 of 16 Page 1 of 1


Add Comment
Name
Comment

* No HTML


Verification *
Please Enter the Verification Code Seen Below
 


PLEASE NOTE
Please see our About Page, our Disclaimer, and our Comments Policy.


FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the DMCA and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.

About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



Advanced Search
Username:

Password:

Remember Me
Forgot Password?
Register

Illinois Cops Caught Red-Handed Lying Under Oath In Marijuana Case - 04/16Cop Swerves His SUV Into Longboarders To Enforce $35 Bylaw Violation - 04/14SC Man Facing Federal Charges Over $.89 Drink Refill - 04/17Peoria, Illinois Mayor Orders Police Raid Over Parody Twitter Account - 04/18The Disturbing Messages in Police Recruiting Videos - 04/17Ranchers vs. Regulators: The Clark County Range War - 04/17Bundy, the Senecas and Fighting for Sovereignty - 04/17Tax Day: What Kind of "Civilization" Are We Paying For? - 04/14

Rialto, CA Police Made to Wear Cameras, Use of Force Drops by Over Two-ThirdsCop Who Karate Chopped NY Judge In Throat Gets Off Scot-FreeFlorida Cop Smashes Compliant Woman's Face Into Car -- "Maybe Now You Can Understand Simple Instructions"VIDEO: Lapel Cam Reveals A Day In The Life Of A U.S. Police Officer (Tasing, Beating, Breaking & Entering, Stomping On Heads... and Laughing About It)Caught On Tape: Officer Sucker Punches Inmate In Face, Files Report Claiming 'Self Defense'Insult Person On Twitter, Go To JailSWAT Team Brings TV Crew To Film Raid Against Threatening Internet Critic -- Raids Innocent Grandma InsteadCop Karate Chops NY Judge In The Throat
(more)

 
Top