By Richard Edmondson
Thirteen years ago, in the year 2001, the World Trade Center’s Building # 7 watched his two larger companions, the North and South towers, collapse and crumble into their own footprints and thought to himself, “Gee, that looks like fun! I’m gonna try it too!”
If you reject the overwhelming evidence that the building collapses that occurred on 9/11 came about as a result of controlled demolition, then that’s pretty much the only theory you are left with: i.e. that an inanimate object—in this case a high-rise building—experienced a very human-like emotion in the form of longing to emulate its own peers. And then managed to do so.
Well sure, that could happen…couldn’t it? Perhaps the conspiracy theorists who subscribe to the official version of 9/11 might say yes, but most rational, thinking people would say no.
Actually, the American public, in my own humble opinion, owes Larry Silverstein a tremendous debt of gratitude. In making his reputed decision to “pull it,” Lucky Larry seems to have cast a peculiar light of clarity over the whole issue of 9/11. The striking similarity of the three building collapses that occurred that day stands in equally striking contrast to the fact that only two of the buildings were hit by airplanes.
Had Building 7 remained standing, or, alternately, had all three buildings been hit by airplanes, then the picture we have today would be considerably more obfuscated (for some), and the issue therefore harder to argue.
But the fact that all three buildings collapsed—while only two were hit by megalithic, jet-fuel-powered projectiles—underscores, in boldface, the fact that a major component of the official story is insupportable. And if the government’s explanation for what happened to Building 7 comes unglued, then the entire, unabridged official 9/11 narrative is called into question—to the point where today, thirteen years later, the whole flimsy, problematic ‘planes-hijacked-by-boxcutter-wielding-terrorists-who-somehow-managed-to-evade-NORAD’ ideology has inexorably and involuntarily unraveled.
Who went to all the trouble and expense of wiring Building 7 for demolition, and why? Were they expecting another plane to materialize out of the sky that day and crash into it? And when, by 5:20 in the afternoon, that third plane still had not materialized, did they then make the decision to go ahead and “pull it” anyway? Questions like these cry out for the opening of a new 9/11 investigation, one that, ideally, would be conducted by an international body comprised of respected jurists from multiple countries—not an “in house” investigation overseen by a US/Israeli dual citizen, which in fact is what we got, as I noted in an article last month. Here in part is what I wrote:
In either event, the 9/11 Commission Report obviously suffers from a number of glaring deficiencies. Why would that be? Maybe venturing into such areas of inquiry as the collapse of Building 7 was thought inadvisable by the commission’s executive director, Philip Zelikow, a US-Israeli dual citizen. One report, here, states that Zelikow “ran the commission and took charge of the writing of its final report.” ( And see also: Zelikow’s Key Role in 9/11Cover-Up, with Maidhc Ó Cathail, plus The Corbett Report, Learn History with Philip Zelikow! )
And Zelikow wasn’t the only Zionist Jew involved in adjudicating matters pertaining to 9/11:
Aside from the activities of the 9/11 Commission, a 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund (VCF), set up by Congress, was also overseen by a Jew—Kenneth Feinberg—who decided how much, or how little, each claimant would receive, while a Jewish federal judge, Alvin K. Hellerstein, has presided over litigation brought by 9/11 victims. But in reality there have been very few lawsuits. In order to get compensation from the VCF, victims were forced to waive their rights to go to court. Of all those eligible to file claims, 97 percent elected for cash payment from the fund.
“I was told by an attorney that at my age (60) I would have to wait for possibly 20 years to recover any money from litigation,” said one 9/11 victim
“From what I experienced, the fund was shut up money,” said another.
Various aspects of 9/11 and the events surrounding that day can be debated, but a couple of things are clear, namely that Israel stood to be one of the chief beneficiaries of a major terrorist attack on America, and also that Israeli fingerprints seem to be all over the affair.
In addition to the so-called five dancing Israelis, more than a hundred Israeli nationals posing as ‘art students’ were also detained or arrested in the US between March 2001 and September 11, while additional Israelis, some 60 in all, were detained in the weeks after 9/11, this according to Carl Cameron’s now-famous Fox News reports.
“A handful of active military were among those detained, according to investigators, who say some of the detainees also failed polygraph questions when asked about surveillance activities against and in the United States,” Cameron reported.
The deficiencies in the official 9/11 report are apparent for anyone with ears to hear and eyes to see. “You don’t need to be an engineer or an architect to see what happened to those buildings,” remarks one of the engineers interviewed in the “ReThink 911” video above. And that of course is correct. You don’t. Common sense tells us that a steel-reinforced high-rise office tower cannot collapse symmetrically, in the way Building 7 did, without all the beams somehow breaking down and disintegrating simultaneously. But yet not a single US official is calling for a new investigation.
Congressional leaders and members of the Obama administration continue to strut around Washington, making their appearances on Sunday morning talk shows, while in essence they go about perpetuating a giant charade—for what else can you call the official 9/11 narrative but that?—and in doing so they demonstrate their open contempt for the American people.
Yet Building 7 continues to be the glaring hole in the government story, and awareness of it is growing. That factor alone—WTC7’s collapse—probably more so than any other—has fueled the 9/11 truth movement, and it has also enabled Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth to purchase a massive, two-sided digital billboard in Times Square that will be on display throughout the month.
A new poll sponsored by ReThink 911 found that 46% of Americans, when shown video of Building 7’s collapse—video that is now on display in Times Square—are sure or suspect that the collapse was caused by a controlled demolition, compared to only 28% who are sure or suspect it was caused by fires, while 27% are unsure. Figures like this suggest that the luck of Lucky Larry may at some point run abruptly out.