Does Official Denial Of WTC Demolition Imply Official Complicity?

Aidan Monaghan

The evidence suggesting a deliberate demolition of the WTC on 9/11 is nearly overwhelming.

And on September 11, 2001, the media, NYC authorities and even the FBI apparently acknowledged a belief that devices inside of the towers were what contributed to their destructions.

Yet since that time, a demolition of the WTC towers has been denied repeatedly by official authorities.

Why the dramatic change in official opinion?

With the media and authorities going on record on 9/11/2001, theorizing that devices brought down the WTC buildings, blaming Al Qeada would have seemed a logical next step.

This certainly would have been accepted publicly without much controversy, given the 1993 bombing.

Yet apparently, a decision was quickly made by some likely powerful official entity to deny a demolition of the WTC.

Would this indicate official complicity or knowledge by some of official complicity?

And what management figures within the major media may have been consulted or advised to no longer discuss a demolition of the WTC that they themselves first reported?

Interestingly, none of those accused of carrying out 9/11, from Osama Bin Laden to Khalid Sheik Mohammad, have mentioned a demolition of the WTC buildings being part of the attacks, even given the impressive body of evidence suggesting such a demolition.

The apparent demolition of the WTC is the area where the official 9/11 myth is most vulnerable.

Why the dramatic change in official opinion?

You ask:

"Why the dramatic change in official opinion? "

How would they explain how the bombs got in the buildings? Al CIA-ada would make a terrible "patsy" for that one.

"Official opinion?"

It didn't become "official opinion" until the media were told exactly what their "official opinion" would be. This was accomplished in large part somtime on the afternoon of September 11, 2001. Around the time when CNN and BBC started predicting the sudden collapse of steel and concrete structures like WTC 7.

Can you imagine their surprise when their reporting of the impending collapse was followed by a sudden and total implosion of a near 50 story steel and concrete building! Talk about your "holy shit" moments. What followed was total and complete silence on the topic of WTC7. What does that tell you?

It tells me that the "official opinion" was simply this... keep your mouth shut and do as you are told.
"Cogito ergo sum"

very good point

my guess would be that the demolition was a surprise to most people, MAYBE even some people who knew about the plan to crash planes. When they realized the truth (explosives MUST have been used) I think everyone realized the gravity of the holy shit fest (no puns intended) that would result and kept their mouths shut, or if they said something it was never reported. We know for example that Barry Jennings, witness with Michael Hess the corporation counsel to an explosion on the 7th or 8th floor (probably 7th given NIST's desire to have only floors 8 and up considered, mentioned in Jones' new paper) now has amnesia. Yeah right. Basically when people realized the implications of Silverstein's involvement, his political connections, the presence of large numbers of Israeli agents, it became an extremely hot potato (upwards of 2750 deg F) and the word went out to shut up. Minjd you not JUST because of the Israeli angle, but that in combination with the likely or apparently liekly complicity of high level USG figures like Cheney and Rumsfeld and also people like Giuliani. Faced with the choice of going along with blaming people who were already known to be bad guys and opening a shitstorm, I think most people made the obvious, if less noble choice. I've often heard people say--look, these guys ARE bad (al Qaeda) and they took credit for it! Why are you trying to complicate things? Yep, it's the path of least resistance alright, too bad it's a path to hell!



Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force


Osama lives in a mud-hut @ 9.36 ET !

It seems like the OCT started even before the towers had collapsed :

Great video, Peter! Those "commentators" were obviously shills

and agents planted to support the "Official Lie" on 9/11!!!

They should be arrested & tell us how they had all this "information"!!!

Jerome Hauer et al

Check out all of the commission members:
The usual suspects are still on the streets.

How the hell could al-Qeada have gained access to a building

that housed CIA, FBI, SEC, Ghouliani's bunker, etc. to wire it for implosion??? A building in a complex that had a "terrorist bombing" attack in 1993, no less???

exactly !

and that's one reason why WTC7 is so important :
Only Al CIAda could have planted the explosives.
It's one of the debunkers favourite arguments against
"government" involvement in the controlled demolition :
"they didn't have the time to rig the building" they say.
well, WHO DID have the time then ?
The fact that Fix news shows it and John Kerry acknowledges CD shows that "they" KNOW
this is their weak point .
I think that the Skulls are fighting the Bones over this. ( abc is another mason-operated propaganda outlet )
It's also the reason that Rosie is allowed to talk about it on
abc . Remember, abc was ALSO shooting from the same location as BBC ("the Window").
I believe that the LIES are the key to bringing the perps
to justice.
It's very likely that we will never be able to prove the full, whole corrupt truth about 911 so we have a choice to make :
Is it the full truth we want or is it good enough to expose
and remove the liars ?
Doing both would be great but just removing "the Decider" and his handlers wouldn't be bad either .