John Kerry: WTC 7 Was Deliberately Demolished

Massachusetts Senator's conclusion directly contradicts 9/11 official story, multi-billion dollar insurance lawsuit
By Paul Joseph Watson & Aaron Dykes
Monday, April 23, 2007

“... I think they made the decision based on the danger that it had in destroying other things, that they did it in a controlled fashion...”

At a recent speaking engagement in Austin Texas, Senator John Kerry responded to a question about WTC Building 7 by concluding that according to his information, the building was brought down as a result of a controlled demolition, directly contradicting the official line that the structure fell as a result of fire and debris damage.

WTC Building 7 was a 47-story building in the WTC complex that collapsed at 5:20pm on September 11. The building had been structurally reinforced and was not hit by a plane, yet it collapsed in a uniform implosion within its own footprint in a matter of seconds after sustaining relatively light debris and fire damage following the collapse of the twin towers.

News networks like BBC and CNN were reporting that the building had collapsed before it fell, indicating that the media were being handed a script of events that had yet to even unfold.

Ground zero EMT's, firefighters and police were all told hours in advance to clear a collapse zone for Building 7 as it was going to be "brought down."

Questioned on WTC 7 by members of Austin 9/11 Truth Now at a Book People event in Austin Texas, Kerry responded, "I do know that that wall, I remember, was in danger and I think they made the decision based on the danger that it had in destroying other things, that they did it in a controlled fashion."

Kerry is basically saying that the building was intentionally demolished to prevent a random collapse from damaging nearby buildings, but that premise has never been explicitly admitted, with officials clinging to the notion that the collapse was expected but was not aided by means of explosive charges, because to admit to a controlled demolition would be to expose foreknowledge of 9/11 itself.

Whether Kerry is basing his response on inside knowledge or hearsay is largely irrelevant, the fact that a sitting United States Senator is openly contradicting the official 9/11 story as well as a multi-billion dollar insurance lawsuit strikes at the root of the controversy surrounding Building 7.

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 accidental event caused by the fall of the twin towers.

EMT's, firefighters and first responders all knew the building was pulled, anyone with an ounce of common sense can watch the videos and understand that buildings don't commit suicide - and yet Silverstein, the government, and their propaganda arm Popular Mechanics, are wedded to the myth that the structure fell as a result of fire damage. They are beholden to this explanation because any revision on their behalf would undermine the entire sequence of events on 9/11 and call into question other aspects of the official story.

Their credibility rests on sweeping the issue of WTC 7 under the rug, which makes it our responsibility to keep beating the Building 7 drum.

Official reports from both NIST and FEMA state that they cannot explain why Building 7 fell, but maintain that it was related to a terrorist attack on the complex on 9/11. However, the FEMA report concludes that, "The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. The best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue."

NIST is currently undertaking a study of WTC 7 to determine if bombs or incendiary devices were used to bring down the building.

Controlled demolitions expert Danny Jowenko was shown footage and building schematics of Building 7 by Dutch television and immediately concluded that its collapse was a result of deliberately placed explosives.

Preparing to demolish even a moderate sized building takes weeks of preparation. A building as large as WTC 7, a 47-story skyscraper, must have taken at least as long. Therefore, the idea that the building was demolished in response to fires spread from the twin towers is not a satisfactory response, as the building could not have been set up for unexpected demolition in only a few hours, much less while fires burned inside. All personnel were withdrawn from the area very early, meaning the explosives which can clearly be seen in the videos were placed days or weeks before 9/11.

Kerry was also asked about the research of Dr. Steven Jones, who has tested both samples of steel from the twin towers as well as recovered dust, which have both tested positive for the chemical signature of Thermate, which is used to cut support beams in localized reactions during a controlled demolition.

Kerry stated that he was not aware of the research and is "open to hearing anything based in fact and evidence."

Since John Kerry is a fellow Skull and Bones member with President Bush, allied to the fact that he took a dive despite massive evidence of vote fraud during the 2004 election, we won't hold our breath on the possibility of Kerry being a torch bearer for a new investigation into 9/11, but his conclusion that WTC 7 was deliberately demolished adds substantial weight to a 9/11 enigma that officials are terrified will reach critical mass.


When confronted with hard facts and scientific evidence linking key government officials to the attacks of 9/11, ostensibly intelligent, levelheaded people angrily and defiantly reject said information without a moment's deliberation. Sincerely compassionate and peace-loving individuals support the criminal invasion of Iraq and close their eyes to the U.S. slaughter of 600,000 Iraqi civilians, choosing instead to believe in the myth of American supremacy, at the heart of which lies the notion that foreigners alone are capable of such atrocities.

As the Truth Movement gains momentum and amasses credibility, the fear profiteers have begun heralding yet another "threat" to National Security - inquiring minds. This is both good news and bad news. We are no longer ignorable. Fearing exposure, the Czars of Propaganda know that "Truthers" must be branded and discredited if government corruption and corporate fraud is to flourish unabated. This said, prepare for an intensified Smear-and-Fear Campaign. Any group or individual who vocally questions the official story of 9/11 or who exercises the right to demand Government accountability will be labeled "Anti-American and Anti-Patriotic." - Donna J. Thorne

"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth…. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those, who having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not..? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it might cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know it - now." - Patrick Henry, 1775.

Why Doubt 9/11?

Why Doubt 9/11?
by James H. Fetzer

As the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, I would observe that our members, building on prior research by earlier students of 9/11, have established more than a dozen disproofs of the official government account, the truth of any one of which is enough to show that the government's account - in one or another of its guises - cannot possibly be correct.

Overview of New 9/11 Research

1. The impact of the planes cannot have caused enough damage to bring the buildings down, since the buildings were designed to withstand them (as Frank DeMartini, the project manager, has observed), the planes that hit were very similar to those they were designed to withstand, and they continued to stand after those impacts with negligible effects.

2. The melting point of steel at 2,800*F is about 1,000*F higher than the maximum burning temperature of jet-fuel-based fires, which do not exceed 1,800*F under optimal conditions, so the fires cannot have caused the steel to melt, which means that melting steel did not bring the buildings down.

3. UL certified the steel in the buildings up to 2,000*F for three or four hours before it would even significantly weaken, where these fires burned too low and too briefly at an average temperature of around 500*F - about one hour in the South Tower and one and a half in the North - to have even caused the steel to weaken, much less melt.

4. If the steel had melted or weakened, the affected floors would have displayed completely different behavior, with some asymmetrical sagging and tilting, which would have been gradual and slow, not the complete, abrupt, and total demolition that was observed.

5. William Rodriguez, the senior custodian in the North Tower and the last man to leave the building, has reported massive explosions in the subbasements that effected extensive destruction, including the demolition of a 50-ton hydraulic press and ripping the skin off a fellow worker, a report corroborated by the testimony of around three dozen other custodians.

6. Willie reported that the explosion occurred prior to the airplane's impact, a claim that has now been substantiated in a new study by Craig Furlong and Gordon Ross, "Seismic Proof: 9/11 was an Inside Job", which demonstrates that these explosions actually took place as much as 14 and 17 seconds prior to the airplanes impacts.

7. Heavy steel construction buildings like the Twin Towers, built with more than 100,000 tons of steel, are not even capable of "pancake collapse", which normally only occurs with concrete structures of "lift slab" construction and could not occur in "redundant" welded-steel buildings, such as the towers, unless every supporting column were removed at the same time, as Charles Pegelow has pointed out to me.

8. The destruction of the Twin Towers in approximately 10 seconds apiece is even faster than free fall with only air resistance, which would have taken at least 12 seconds, which, as Judy Wood has emphasized, is an astounding result that would have been impossible without extremely powerful explosives.

9. The towers are exploding from the top, not collapsing to the ground, where the floors do not move, a phenomenon that Judy Wood has likened to two gigantic trees turning to sawdust from the top down, which, like the pulverization of the concrete, the official account cannot possibly explain.

10. Pools of molten metal were found at the subbasement levels three, four, and five weeks later, an effect that could not have been produced by the plane-impact/jet-fuel-fire/pancake collapse scenario, which, of course, implies that it was not produced by such a cause.


Replay a few times and notice:

* The roofs dips inward
* Explosions are visible running up on the right side
* Explosions are visible in the front
* Simultaneous symmetrical collapse (all joints fail at the same time)
* Falls at free-fall speed
* Falls into its own footprint without damaging surrounding buildings

Learn more about World Trade Center 7!
_____________________________________________

11. WTC-7 came down in a classic controlled demolition at 5:20 PM/ET after Larry Silverstein suggested the best thing to do might be to "pull it", displaying all the characteristics of classic controlled demolitions, including a complete, abrupt, and total collapse into its own footprint, where the floors are all falling at the same time, and so forth, an event so embarrassing to the official account that it is not even mentioned in THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT.

12. The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Which means that the building was not hit by a Boeing 757!


13. The Pentagon's own videotape does not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O'Reilly admitted when it was shown on "The Factor"; but at 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 71-foot Pentagon is high and should have been present and visible; it was not, which means that the building was not hit by a Boeing 757!

14. The aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory - flying at high speed barely above ground level - physically impossible; and if it had come in at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater; but there is no crater and the government has no way out, which means that the building was not hit by a Boeing 757!

15. If Flight 93 had come down as advertised, then there would have been a debris field of about a city block in size, but in fact the debris is distributed over an area of about eight square miles, which would be explainable if the plane had been shot down in the air but not if it had crashed as required by the government's official scenario.

There are more, especially about the alleged hijackers, including that they were not competent to fly the planes; their names were not on any passenger manifest; they were not subject to any autopsy; several have turned up alive and well; the cell phone calls appear to have been impossible; on and on. The evidence may be found at 911Scholars.org.

James H. Fetzer, Ph.D.
Founder and Co-Chair
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
email: jfetzer@d.umn.edu
http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/
http://www.911Scholars.org (911Scholars.org)



I just received this email from archeocryptographer Michael Lawrence Morton which is self-explanatory:

This link details Dr.Judy Wood's filing of a 'Request For Correction' (on 16 March 2007) to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) regarding the 09/11/01 World Trade Center destruction.

Dr. Wood (pictured at left) has made a very compelling case that DEW (Directed Energy Weapons) were used to destroy Towers 1 and 2 of The WTC on 09/11/01. I highly recommend that you check this out.

Dr. Wood has a lot of very compelling photographic evidence as part of her analysis, by the way. Are you aware that: the rubble at the subbasements of Towers 1 and 2 was only 20 percent of what its mass should have been? That roughly 80 percent of the Towers 1 and 2 were completely pulverized into an extremely fine dust? That over a thousand automobiles in the vicinity were bizarrely 'toasted'? That Towers 1 and 2 were destroyed from the top down? AND MUCH, MUCH MORE ... Yes, there is good evidence that 'Beam Technology' was used on Towers 1 and 2.

-- MLM

[NOTE: In case you're wondering why I've been posting an entire series on 911 in recent days, it isn't because I have nothing else to blog about. I have a gut feeling that a massive breakthrough in 911 revelations is at hand - and when enough humans awaken to the grotesque horror of the evil scams being pulled on us, we shall snap out of our "cultural trance" - in the process reclaiming our individual sovereignty and breaking free of mental slavery - and the Orwellian nightmare of mass mind control will crumble, just like the Twin Towers of Mordor, into toxic dust, and be blown away by the winds of wholesome change.]