posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 10:44 AM
reply to post by BlackOps719
Implications of controlled demolition of WTC7:
1. Silverstein is guilty of a fraudulent claim for damages for the building he insured against acts of terrorism. You cannot make insurance claims
over a building you secretly had blown up. He should be sent to prison for many years;
2. He is guilty of lying when he publicly denied in September, 2005 that he had meant his infamous words "pull it" to mean that WTC7 should be
demolished;
3. WTC7 must have been rigged for controlled demolition BEFORE 9/11, as there was not sufficient time to do this in the few hours between
mid-afternoon, when Silverstein said he agreed to WTC7 being "pulled", and 5.20pm, when it collapsed. This makes it plausible that WTC1 and WTC2
were likewise rigged;
4. NIST is lying when it states there there is no evidence of explosions in WTC7 either before it collapsed or just before it fell;
5. the US government (like many fire fighters and police at the scene of WTC7)
knows why WTC7 fell. Therefore, asking NIST to investigate the
reasons for its collapse is entirely bogus - a cover to hide its complicity.
6. it indicates that, if the US government lies about why WTC7 fell, that
none of the details of its account of the events of 9/11 can be
trusted.