Silverstein was "on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize demolition"

[MikeWB]

http://www.informationliberation.com/index.php?id=30060

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.

[MikeWB]

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/04/ ... ept-shame/

Shame On Jesse Ventura!
By Jeffrey Scott Shapiro  - FOXNews.com
The former Minnesota governor has discredited himself, and dishonored and defamed his country by promoting the mistaken view that our government was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks.

PRINTEMAILSHARE RECOMMEND (3)    
Jesse Ventura should be ashamed of himself and embarrassed.

The former Minnesota governor recently lent his political credentials to the discredited 9/11 "Truther" movement by alleging that the Sept. 11 attacks were either planned or permitted by the United States government.

This recent admission was only a small part of Ventura's new book, "American Conspiracies: Lies, Lies and More Lies the Government Tells Us," which echoes a revisionist account of American history that holds the Bush administration responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks by implying that the Bush administration either knew about the attacks, did nothing to stop them or actually participated in them.

During a March 10 interview with Barbara Walters on "The View," Ventura implied the Bush/Cheney administration used 9/11 as a pretense to start the Iraq War under false pretenses. Ventura apparently developed this theory after former Kennedy/Johnson adviser Robert McNamara visited him at Harvard and allegedly admitted to him that the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which escalated the Vietnam War, never actually happened.

Perhaps what Ventura is missing is that there is probably more incontrovertible evidence and more witnesses who have already established what happened on Sept. 11, 2001 than most major historical events. To dispute the conventional historical account is intellectually dishonest and nonsensical.


I know this because I was working as a journalist for Gannett News at Ground Zero that day, and I remember very clearly what I saw and heard.

Although I arrived at Ground Zero shortly after the Twin Towers fell, I was in the danger zone created by Building 7 from the moment it collapsed in the afternoon, an event that is one of the key cornerstones of the 9/11 conspiracy theory.

Governor Ventura and many 9/11 "Truthers" allege that government explosives caused the afternoon collapse of Building 7. This is false. I know this because I remember watching all 47 stories of Building 7 suddenly and silently crumble before my eyes.

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.

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.
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.

The myth that Building 7 was blown up by the U.S. government is false – and so is the broader theory that our government was somehow involved in the 9/11 attacks. I know this because I was one of the few reporters who investigated 9/11 conspiracy theories and urban legends on location in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy.

In October 2001, I reported on a story for Gannett newspaper, The Journal News, that the FBI Joint Terrorist Task Force was investigating a Brooklyn high school student for predicting the collapse of the World Trade Center five days before it happened.

To my surprise, the NYC Board of Education confirmed the story on the record and the FBI confirmed there had been rumors circulating in the New York City Arab-American community about a possible attack on Manhattan. My story was immediately confirmed by Newsweek Senior Editor Jonathan Alter, and after I penned a follow up in The Washington Times magazine, "Insight," I was interviewed by Fox News' Bill O'Reilly on "The O'Reilly Factor."

My investigation into 9/11 conspiracy theories and urban legends led me to interview both American and Israeli intelligence officials as well as representatives of the Afghan Northern Alliance, FBI, NYPD and sources within the Muslim community of New York City.

Although I found trace evidence that vague rumors circulated within the Arab-American community that "something was going to happen" in "lower downtown Manhattan" on Sept. 11, I found no evidence of any conspiracy other than the one hatched by Al Qaeda that was later confirmed by the 9/11 Commission.

Since Al Qaeda once operated out of the Alkifah Refugee Center on Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn and had many low level operatives working in the NYC area, it did not surprise me that rumors of their plan had leaked within the Arab-American community of New York. Many similar rumors and reports occur frequently, however, and so I have never faulted the Arab-American community or our government for not acting upon them.

In no instance did I ever once talk to one source who even hinted the American government had any foreknowledge or involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks. As an investigative reporter who survived the collapse of Building 7 and doggedly investigated 9/11 conspiracy theories in the wake of the attack, I am convinced the 9/11 "Truther" movement is nothing more than a paranoid, delusional pack of lies.

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. Governor Ventura has discredited himself, and dishonored and defamed his country by promoting these intellectually dishonest views. He should be ashamed of himself.

Jeffrey Scott Shapiro is a former Washington, D.C. prosecutor and investigative reporter who covered the Sept. 11 attacks on location. To read his Washington Times/Insight piece, "Stories Prior Knowledge of 9/11 More Than Urban Legend," click here.

[maz]

That writer is a moron  :lol:

[MikeWB]

That writer is a moron  :lol:

Either that or one of the secret "truthers"... hahaha :lol:

[Rockclimber]

One of the tribe trying to look out for one of the tribe and whoops, let's the cat out of the bag! Hey thanks!

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

One of the tribe trying to look out for one of the tribe and whoops, let's the cat out of the bag! Hey thanks!

If it only was a Child's cartoon... perhaps... they could contain it.  

[Christopher Marlowe]

To me this is huge. A journalist who was told by NYPD and Con-Ed workers that Silverstein was seeking to blow up WTC-7 on 9/11.

He seems to stick pretty closely to the "Jews didn't do it; Arabs did angle":

I found trace evidence that vague rumors circulated within the Arab-American community that "something was going to happen" in "lower downtown Manhattan" on Sept. 11

Since Al Qaeda once operated out of the Alkifah Refugee Center on Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn and had many low level operatives working in the NYC area, it did not surprise me that rumors of their plan had leaked within the Arab-American community of New York.

Do you believe this f*cking guy?  Yeah.  Remember the Al Qaeda pizza delivery service on Elm St?  "We deliver it hot and fresh to your door within 30 minutes, or we'll blow ourselves up!"  

But his article is a little schizophrenic.  He appears to want to deny controlled demolition and allow for it at the same time.  His language seems to deny controlled demolition "by the government":  

The myth that Building 7 was blown up by the U.S. government is false – and so is the broader theory that our government was somehow involved in the 9/11 attacks.

Note the qualifier in that sentence.  Why not just say: blown up?

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.

This is more definite.

Yet his mentioning of Silverstein calling his insurers on 9/11 seems to allow for the possibility of controlled demo:

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.

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.

Shapiro seems to want to say: The government didn't blow up the buildings. They weren't blown up. But if they were blown up, it would not have been a conspiracy because everyone know it was a real possibility and it would have saved lives.

[MikeWB]

Here's his email: http://drinkthis.typepad.com/shapiro/20 ... y_s_1.html )

Anyone wanna ask him to debunk our "All the proof in the world" page? :lol:

[LordLindsey]

In trying to be a contortionist in DENYING WHAT ANYONE WITH ONE EYE AND HALF A BRAIN CAN SEE AND UNDERSTAND, this "Irishman" made the same mistake as those he ATTEMPTS to defend:  Lack of hubris and stunning arrogance seems to be the recipe needed for an even more powerful revelation than what would have been had these good "Irishmen" just kept their mouths shut.

Yeppers...it's the "IRISH" who run the whole show, from the top-down, and can just come-out and say something as critically powerful as that the owner of the buildings that were DEMOLISHED on 911 apparently made it known that the buildings were wired-to-go...

except there is ONE (1) problem with all of this:  It takes A LONG TIME to wire a building for demolition, as WTC 7...so how did Silverstein know that the building was wired and ready for the call to "Pull it!"?  Shit, this entire article is so obvious that I don't even need to say anything more except that the police DEFINITELY should be involved as a very real argument for AT LEAST insurance fraud can be made from the apparent witness-"journalist" who wrote this.  

Or is this going to go the way of almost every other major revelation that has surfaced, and be forgotten within a week or two?

LINDSEY