World Trade Center Building 7 demands tenacious public scrutiny

The number of Americans that do not believe the federal government’s official account of what happened in New York City on September 11, 2001 is rapidly increasing.
Let’s assume that there is at least a cover-up by the Bush Administration and agents within the intelligence, law enforcement, and military communities of the federal government. What tactic should we take to break the chain of deception the government has wrapped around our necks? When held captive by the chains of deception, the only way to break free is to find the weakest link and then, with all the might that can be mustered, shatter it. When looking at all the evidence, and lack there of, pertaining to 9/11, the weakest link in the government’s account is World Trade Center Building 7. If the American people really want to expose a felony fraud that would most definitely result in the public execution of government agents and officials for the crimes of treason and mass murder, then there needs to be a full force frontal offensive on WTC-7. For if the federal government’s account of WTC-7 fails, all of the 9/11 Commission Report and virtually every element of the Bush Administration’s policies since 9/11 becomes highly vulnerable to failure also. Therefore, what is needed right now, is a persistent, tenacious, singleness of purpose, public inquiry into how and why WTC-7 collapsed at 5:20pm EST on September 11, 2001.
WTC-7 is the only known steel structured building to have reportedly collapsed as the result of a fire. When photographs of the WTC-7 fires are compared to pictures of other steel skyscraper fires that look like infernos in comparison to the fires of WTC-7, it is nearly impossible to believe that these other skyscrapers did not collapse due to fire, if the WTC-7 account is truthful. WTC-7 collapsed straight downward, exactly as a building does during a controlled demolition. For WTC-7 to have collapsed the way it did using the government’s account of fire as the cause requires that the fires between the 6th and 12th floors to have somehow and miraculously weakened all of the load-bearing walls of this 47-story structure, simultaneously, so that each of the load-bearing walls could and would fail at exactly the same moment, allowing the structure to collapse directly on top of its footprint.

According to the Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a non-partisan association of faculty, students, and scholars, in fields as diverse as history, science, military affairs, psychology, and philosophy, dedicated to exposing falsehoods and revealing the truth behind 9/11, WTC-7 had fifty-eight perimeter columns and 25 core columns. In order for WTC-7 to sink into its footprint, all of the core columns and all of the perimeter columns would have to be broken in the same split-second.

Silverstein, the Zionist who

Silverstein, the Zionist who owned WTC ordered it to be "pulled". He admitted this a couple of years ago. While this is one hole in the 911 skam, a bigger one may be the fact that there was no 757 at the Pentagon, indeed, from all indications it appears to have been hit by a missile. Flight 93, that of the bogus cell phone calls and the Let's Roll movie making drama lies, had a debris field scattered over 5 miles. Not to mention that Donn de Grand Pre states in his book that it was shot down by Major Rick Gebney. 911 Lies, theres a slew of them, and still, there's no plane at the Pentagon.

Check out this video.

Check out this video.
Awesome! While watching it, it dawned on me that the criminality of the Bush regime is unparalleled in all of human history. These guys make Hitler look like an altar boy. Unbelievable!

From the link: "...It was

From the link: "...It was Silverstein’s usage of the term ‘pull it’ that has spurred much of the speculation that WTC-7 was brought down via controlled explosive devises. Silverstein has since attempted to cover his tracks by claiming that what he was referring to was ‘pulling’ the firefighters out of WTC-7, even though there were no firefighters fighting the office fires in WTC-7. Silverstein knows the truth, and should be intensely interrogated..."

If Silverstein really meant that the supposed firefighters should leave the building, he would have said, "pull out" or "pull back", not "pull it."


Dan, let's not blow too much

Dan, let's not blow too much smoke that may obscure the crucial importance of WTC-7 & Silverstein.

IMHO, Gold nailed why WTC-7 is clearly the #1 chink in the Bushies 9/11 armor a few posts back.

I did?

I did?

Yes, Jon Gold. I used to

Yes, Jon Gold. I used to give equal weight to "no plane hit the Pentagon" and "WTC-7" as the 2 best, and EQUAL, smoking guns. However, your recent post made me see that WTC-7 is less complicated & more obvious than "no plane hit Pentagon." The Pentagon mystery is more problematical at present because, as you stated:

"1) It's one of those topics that people cling to in order to chastize us. "A missile.. are you fucking crazy... what happened to the people on the plane?"

2) There are enough witnesses of a plane hitting the Pentagon to bring reasonable doubt to the fold.

3) There is no video footage that's available to the public to show us what exactly hit the Pentagon. Therefore, stating something other than Flight 77 hitting it as fact, is wrong.

4) It's an unwinnable argument for the reasons that I stated. You can't prove one way or the other what hit the Pentagon. It's better to focus on the fact that Government is withholding evidence from the American people (the actual videos) than proclaiming you know what hit it. If you don't, then you will find yourself 40 years from now fighting with people about what might have hit the Pentagon (magic bullet).

[5] Judicial Watch may have filed a lawsuit for the release of those videos. What happens if those videos show Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon? The 9/11 Truth Movement would then lose ALL credibility because the "What Hit The Pentagon Argument" has been one of the main arguments put forth by the majority of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

[6] It's best to lay off the speculation, and focus on what we do know about the Pentagon. What we do know is incriminating enough without the speculation."

You show that current evidence for foul play at WTC-7 is more clean-cut than for no-plane Pentagon.

Glad to be of assistance.

Glad to be of assistance.

Always thought that WTC 7

Always thought that WTC 7 was the weak link in the official 911 version.

But, forget verbal semantics.

Just show anyone the video segment, from "911 Eyewitness", of the penthouse collapsing a second before the rest of the building collapses, let them hear the eyewitness on the ground speak of "the shockwave that ripped up the building, blowing out the windows, right before it collapsed", and ask them (nicely, calmly):

Why does the "official" version say ground level fires caused the WTC 7 building to collapse? How could ground level fires cause the penthouse to freefall first? What do you see that isn't like a controlled demolition?

Watch the lightbulbs click on.

Do it, for America, do it because you care about us all. Nicely, calmly.