Support 911Blogger


The WTC Leaseholder and His Associates That Cheated Death on 9/11: Was it Coincidence or Foreknowledge?

New York real estate developer Larry Silverstein and several key individuals associated with his firm, Silverstein Properties, appear to have had remarkable luck on September 11, 2001, when changes in their schedule or coincidental circumstances saved them from being high up in the World Trade Center when it was attacked.

Silverstein Properties took over the lease of the World Trade Center seven weeks before 9/11, the only time the complex had gone under private control [1], and after 9/11 Larry Silverstein sought damages of over $7 billion from his insurers for the destruction of the Twin Towers. [2] On September 11, the firm had temporary offices on the 88th floor of the North Tower. (American Airlines Flight 11 impacted that tower between its 93rd and 99th floors.) Of its 160 employees, 54 were working in those offices at the time of the attacks and four of them died. [3]

HIGH-LEVEL INDIVIDUALS AVOIDED DANGER ON 9/11
The fortunate circumstances that kept the high-level individuals out of danger the morning of 9/11 were quite extraordinary. Larry Silverstein survived the attacks supposedly because his wife forced him to go to a doctor's appointment instead of a meeting at the WTC; Silverstein's son and daughter survived because, independently of each other, they were running late; his top aide survived because he cut short a meeting he was in at the top of the North Tower; his publicist agreed to join a meeting at the WTC at 9:00 a.m. instead of 8:00 a.m.; and others associated with Silverstein Properties may have avoided danger due to the cancellation of a meeting on the 88th floor of the North Tower.

There are three possible explanations for the combined good fortune of these individuals on September 11. Maybe it was all due to coincidence. Or, more sinisterly, perhaps some of these individuals had foreknowledge of the attacks and therefore knew of the threat to the WTC. Or maybe they received some kind of forewarning from others who had specific foreknowledge of the danger. While it will be impossible to draw definite conclusions until there is a proper investigation, the accounts of these individuals, described below, make clear why such a new investigation into the 9/11 attacks is needed.

WTC LEASEHOLDER PERSUADED TO GO TO DOCTOR'S APPOINTMENT INSTEAD OF TRADE CENTER
After his company took over the lease of the Twin Towers on July 24, 2001, Larry Silverstein reportedly "spent his days at the towers, meeting and greeting his tenants." [4] According to the New York Times, "Every morning after the deal was finalized, Mr. Silverstein held breakfast meetings at Windows on the World," the restaurant at the top of the North Tower. [5] Those meetings would begin at 8:30 a.m. [6]

All of the approximately 170 people in Windows on the World at the time of the attack on the North Tower--8:46 a.m.--died when the tower subsequently collapsed. [7] Yet September 11 was the one morning when Larry Silverstein was not at the restaurant. Instead, he was at his apartment on New York's Park Avenue. [8] The reason, as the Washington Post described, was that he had "complained of a problem with his skin and the sun. His wife, Klara, demanded that he go to the dermatologist. She even made the appointment, which was scheduled for that morning." Silverstein has recalled that he was "getting dressed to go to the doctor" on 9/11, but complained to his wife: "I have so much to do downtown. This is a horrendous waste of my time. I should be going to work." She retorted, "You're not going to cancel this appointment this morning, you're going to the dermatologist." Silverstein has noted, "When you're married to the same woman for 46 years, you learn early on to say, 'Yes, dear.'" He therefore did not head to the WTC. Referring to these circumstances that saved his life, Silverstein commented, "That morning was the serendipitous quality of life." [9]

LEASEHOLDER'S SON AND DAUGHTER LATE FOR MEETINGS AT WTC
Two of Larry Silverstein's three children, Roger and Lisa, were vice presidents of Silverstein Properties. [10] After the company took over the lease of the WTC, Roger and Lisa Silverstein worked in its temporary offices on the 88th floor of the North Tower and, according to the New York Observer, attended meetings with tenants each morning at Windows on the World. But on the morning of September 11, apparently independently of each other, both of them "were running late." As a result, Roger Silverstein was in the parking garage of WTC Building 7 when the North Tower was hit, and Lisa Silverstein was subsequently turned away from the WTC complex by police further uptown. The New York Observer noted, "If the attack had happened just a little later, [Larry] Silverstein's children would likely have been trapped at Windows" on the World. [11]

LEASEHOLDER'S TOP AIDE ENDS MEETING AT WTC EARLY
An executive with Silverstein Properties who was even more fortunate was Larry Silverstein's top aide, Geoffrey Wharton, who was actually at the 8:30 a.m. meeting at Windows on the World that Silverstein missed. [12] Wharton was meeting with Liz Thompson, the executive director of the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council, to discuss the council's relationship with Silverstein Properties, and its studio and performance programs. Fortunately, as Thompson has recalled, Wharton "had to cut the meeting a little short." [13] And, according to the Engineering News-Record, he then "decided to escort his guest down to the lobby." [14] Consequently, Wharton and Thompson got on an elevator at 8:44 a.m., just two minutes before Flight 11 hit the tower. Only two other individuals were in that last elevator down from the 107th floor: Michael Nestor and Richard Tierney, both senior officials with the New York Port Authority, who were leaving the restaurant because Nestor had a meeting downstairs to attend. The four of them were the last people to make it out of Windows on the World alive. [15]

LEASEHOLDER'S PUBLICIST AGREES TO JOIN MEETING AT WTC AN HOUR LATE
Another key individual who was fortunate not to be in the World Trade Center when it was hit was publicist Howard Rubenstein, who had represented Larry Silverstein for over 30 years and would subsequently work with the real estate developer on the reconstruction of the WTC. [16]

The day before 9/11, Rubenstein was called by John O'Neill, the former FBI counterterrorism chief, who had recently started work as head of security at the WTC. O'Neill invited Rubenstein to a meeting he was going to be leading, which would be held in the WTC at 8:00 a.m. on September 11. It was to discuss how the building's management was protecting the Twin Towers against terrorism. Rubenstein has recalled that O'Neill told him, "Bring your staff, two people."

Rubenstein agreed to attend the meeting, because "we were then representing the World Trade Center." However, after further thought he called O'Neill back and said, "I have a staff meeting on Tuesday, do you mind if I don't go?" O'Neill told him to send a colleague in his place, but Rubenstein replied, "But that somebody is also at my staff meeting." So O'Neill told Rubenstein to "come at 9 o'clock instead of 8 o'clock."

According to Rubenstein, the morning of September 11 he was in the staff meeting when his secretary ran in and told him, "The World Trade Center just got hit and you were supposed to be there." While Rubenstein and his staff members were safe, "Everyone at that breakfast meeting died, including John O'Neill." [17]

COMPANY MEETING IN WTC ON 9/11 CANCELED THE NIGHT BEFORE
Furthermore, Silverstein Properties had been scheduled to hold a meeting the morning of September 11 in its offices on the 88th floor of the North Tower, reportedly "to discuss what to do in the event of a terrorist attack." According to the New York Times, that meeting was canceled the night of September 10, "because one participant could not attend." [18] Further details of the meeting--such as who was meant to be there, and whether any people managed to stay away from the WTC on 9/11 thanks to its cancellation--are unknown.

As we can see, some notable people connected with the WTC leaseholder, Larry Silverstein, appear to have been particularly lucky on September 11. Under slightly different circumstances they may well have been among the victims of the attacks. While their accounts, described above, do not prove anything sinister, the series of apparent coincidences that kept these individuals away from danger on 9/11 surely need to be examined as part of a new investigation into the attacks.

NOTES
[1] "Silverstein Properties and Westfield Win $3.2B World Trade Center Lease." International Council of Shopping Centers, April 27, 2001; "Governor Pataki, Acting Governor DiFrancesco Laud Historic Port Authority Agreement to Privatize World Trade Center." Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, July 24, 2001.

[2] Simon English, "Magnate's Tower Plan Under Threat." Daily Telegraph, October 10, 2001; Mark Hamblett, "Jurors Deal World Trade Center Leaseholder Major Setback." New York Law Journal, April 30, 2004.

[3] Doug Saunders, Caroline Alphonso, Colin Freeze, Lisa Priest, and Geoffrey York, "Surviving History." Globe and Mail, September 7, 2002.

[4] Lynne Duke, "At Ground Zero, a Tall Order for the Developer." Washington Post, November 20, 2002.

[5] Deborah Sontag, "The Hole in the City's Heart." New York Times, September 11, 2006.
[6] Nadine M. Post, "World Trade Center's Rebuilders Find Opportunity in the Face of Tragedy." Engineering News-Record, September 13, 2004.
[7] "The Last Elevator." Morning Edition, NPR, September 11, 2003.
[8] Robert Kolker, "Who Wants to Move to Ground Zero?" New York Magazine, May 21, 2005.
[9] Lynne Duke, "At Ground Zero, a Tall Order for the Developer."

[10] Mervyn Rothstein, "Downtown Tower Gets a New Look." New York Times, February 3, 1999; Tracie Rozhon, "Developer Daughters, Born to Build." New York Times, March 22, 2001; Doug Saunders, Caroline Alphonso, Colin Freeze, Lisa Priest, and Geoffrey York, "Surviving History."

[11] Tom McGeveran, "Mike Sees City Taking Control at Ground Zero." New York Observer, March 16, 2003; Robert Kolker, "Who Wants to Move to Ground Zero?"

[12] Nadine M. Post, "World Trade Center's Rebuilders Find Opportunity in the Face of Tragedy."

[13] Jim Dwyer, Eric Lipton, Kevin Flynn, James Glanz, and Ford Fessenden, "Fighting to Live as the Towers Died." New York Times, May 26, 2002; Creative Downtown: The Role of Culture in Rebuilding Lower Manhattan. New York: New York City Arts Coalition, 2002, p. 9.

[14] Nadine M. Post, "World Trade Center's Rebuilders Find Opportunity in the Face of Tragedy."

[15] Jim Dwyer, Eric Lipton, Kevin Flynn, James Glanz, and Ford Fessenden, "Fighting to Live as the Towers Died"; "The Last Elevator."

[16] Dennis Fitzgerald, "The Bold and the Beautiful." The Deal, June 7, 2004.

[17] Charlie Rose. PBS, July 15, 2004; Aliza Davidovit, "Howard Rubenstein: Best Face Forward." Lifestyles Magazine, Fall 2004.

[18] Andrew Ross Sorkin and Simon Romero, "Reinsurance Companies Wait to Sort out Cost of Damages." New York Times, September 12, 2001.
 

Good write-up!

Nice piece!

Silverstein already thinking about insurance payout on 9/11

Also, check out this previous blog entry of mine, describing how Larry Silverstein was already contacting his lawyers on the evening of 9/11, to find out "whether his insurance policies could be read in a way that would construe the attacks as two separate, insurable incidents rather than one":
http://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2007/06/larry-silverstein-was-already-thinking.html

Silverstein shows a crack anytime he is asked a tough

question on the demolition of the buildings.

Rubernstein public realtions firm has been covering for Silverstein. http://www.rubenstein.com/index.html

Lucky Larry Silverstein EXPOSED

Absent

Good work, and didn't a couple of Bushes also have charmed lives that day?

Bush's cousin had 'lucky' escape

Jim Pierce, a cousin of President Bush, should have been in a meeting on the 105th floor of the South Tower on 9/11, but the night before, the meeting was moved to a different venue. See this 9/11 Timeline entry for the details:

9:03 a.m. September 11, 2001: Cousin of the President Saved From Death in the South Tower Due to Changed Venue of Meeting
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a903jimpierce&scale=0

The president's brother, Marvin Bush, happened to be in New York at the time of the attacks, for a meeting, though I don't know whether that meeting was meant to have been at the WTC. This fact was mentioned in a book written by former first lady, Barbary Bush. You can read the relevant excerpt here:
http://www.newsweek.com/2003/10/26/the-silver-fox-unplugged.html

Who Killed John O'Neil?

Another key individual who was fortunate not to be in the World Trade Center when it was hit was publicist Howard Rubenstein, who had represented Larry Silverstein for over 30 years and would subsequently work with the real estate developer on the reconstruction of the WTC. [16]

The day before 9/11, Rubenstein was called by John O'Neill, the former FBI counterterrorism chief, who had recently started work as head of security at the WTC. O'Neill invited Rubenstein to a meeting he was going to be leading, which would be held in the WTC at 8:00 a.m. on September 11. It was to discuss how the building's management was protecting the Twin Towers against terrorism. Rubenstein has recalled that O'Neill told him, "Bring your staff, two people."

Rubenstein agreed to attend the meeting, because "we were then representing the World Trade Center." However, after further thought he called O'Neill back and said, "I have a staff meeting on Tuesday, do you mind if I don't go?" O'Neill told him to send a colleague in his place, but Rubenstein replied, "But that somebody is also at my staff meeting." So O'Neill told Rubenstein to "come at 9 o'clock instead of 8 o'clock."

According to Rubenstein, the morning of September 11 he was in the staff meeting when his secretary ran in and told him, "The World Trade Center just got hit and you were supposed to be there." While Rubenstein and his staff members were safe, "Everyone at that breakfast meeting died, including John O'Neill." [17]

I believe everybody interested in what really happened on 9/11/01 should watch this video:

Regarding the video, "Who Killed John O'Neil"

I watched about the first 5 minutes. I found the production style of this video to be pretty unbearable. It's one thing if you are trying to create an artistic experience for the viewer, which is the object of much cinema. But this film is supposed to be an exploration of a serious topic, the forces behind the 9/11 attack and how they intersected with John O'Neil, former FBI counter-terrorism chief. In this context, the constant use of music on the sound track, artsy images, etc., is an immense distraction, and actually works against the presentation of the authors' argument.

Film and video are media that are more suitable to manipulation of human emotions than of rational argument. Unfortunately, a question like "who killed John O'Neil" requires rational investigation--something that is better suited to presentation in print, or by a persuasive human speaker (Richard Gage comes to mind). If you are going to present this kind of material in video form, you have to be very careful not to try to manipulate the viewer via the usual film cliches--most people these days are familiar with such devices and, conciously or unconciously, will distrust video about a serious subject that attempts to manipulate them the way Hollywood productions do.

It is unfortunate that the makers of too many videos about 9/11-related subjects have not learned this lesson. All too often we see the use of "dramatic" images, as the ominous music starts up and the trained announcer intones his carefully written script. All very nice for entertainment, but if you want to wake people up to what is going on in the real world, that is NOT how you are going to do it. TeeVee is for lulling the masses to sleep, not for waking them up, if you get my point.

One of the great virtues of Richard Gage's presentations is his refusal to use this kind of manipulation. He just pounds away with the facts and evidence, letting them speak for themselves. He, at least, knows he is not in the entertainment business.

will distrust video about a serious subject that attempts ...

Hu? Then why are so few people paying attention to 9/11 Truth? Seems to me they are pretty well manipulated. The video doesn't use a lot of shock and awe imagery. IIRC, it never shows anything outside the one, rather barren, apartment. I don't agree with you regarding the potential impact of the video. It might not be the hook most people will be grabbed by to wake them up, but anybody who watches it, and takes the time to look into what is presented will realize there is a whole lot of good material there.

http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=297&id2=7655

Why Hillbillery Clinton-Bush isn't talking:

http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=6668&id2=7655

Edit to add: If I understand correctly, you did not watch the video to the end, but are telling me that it isn't worth watching?

Who Killed John O'Neill

http://www.wkjo.com/

I believe WKJO came out in 2006'
One Actor, One Room, Seven Characters: 9/11.

Traumatized by the September 11th attacks, one man struggles to dismantle official history, at the expense of his sanity and even his life. Grappling with multiple realities - and multiple personalities - he must retreat into his mind in pursuit of the truth. In a fictional film about non-fictional events, there is a place where belief and faith will blind you, where nothing is sacred, and to get there all you have to do is ask:

"Who Killed John O'Neill?"

a dead art film by ty rauber and ryan thurston

WKJO Rules of Exhibition

In the spirit of the Creative Commons License, through which the movie is digitally released, we ENCOURAGE the physical exhibition and distribution of this film as long as it is NOT FOR PROFIT.

Please! Download and distribute this movie. Buy the official DVD. Rip it. Burn it. Duplicate it. Give it to people - Anyone, Everyone!

Please! Show it to people. Show the original cut, unedited and uninterrupted. Show it to as many people as you can, on as big of a screen, in as big of a room as you can fill.

Please! Broadcast it over radio. Air it on television. Put it on Satellite. Do it. We dare you. Air the original cut, unedited and uninterrupted.

All that we ask is that it remains not for profit.

I agree

that judging a whole video by watching only five minutes of it is normally unfair. But if the presentation of those first five minutes is so unappealing that you just want to turn the thing off--well, that is a problem.

You ask, "why are so few people paying attention to 9/11 Truth?" There are a number of reasons, but of one thing I am fairly certain: watching an actor meander around his apartment while a distorted voiceover relates bits and pieces of the whole story is unlikely to increase the attention from those not already converted. If I am looking for information about an important issue, I don't want an "artistic" experience, I want whoever is presenting that information to get to the point in a clear, easily comprehended way. The first five minutes of this video are the antithesis of that.

Agreed

The film appears interesting, but I just couldn't make much out of the garbled voices, so I turned it off after 10 minutes.

Also, the pace was a bit... slow. Which must be why the film is so very long.

The content of the first 10 minutes

If you want a simple and clear picture of reality without having to put forth any effort, talk to Wolfe Blitzer.

I trimmed this down for the impatient:

On July 3rd, 1979, the CIA gave birth to Islamic fundamentalism when President Carter signed a directive for United States intelligence to provide radical Islamic thinking and arms to Afghan fighters, before the Soviet Union invaded. This is documented in a 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter's National Security Advisor.

http://politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=4497&id2=1576

Who killed John O'Neill?

I don't sleep.

I don't eat.

I don't shower. I don't shave.

I don't see anybody. I don't talk to anybody.

I can't remember the last time I spoke to anyone or even left my apartment.

I don't do anything but think.

I KNOW they did it.

I want to prove it.

I have to prove it. Prove what?

I HAVE to prove it. Prove WHAT?

I must. I have to. Should I?

The Council on Foreign Relations.

http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=659&id2=4963

The Trilateral Commission. The Bilderberg Group.

Bush family. CIA, Kissinger, Brzezinski... Everybody.

http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=2387&name=Blackston...

Everybody's in on it. EVERYBODY.

Figure out the puzzle.

The Council on Foreign Relations has controlled the world for 50 years.

You can go on their website and read about it.

Am I the only person who feels the need to know more?

I am afraid this obsession will be all for naught.

But I am more afraid of being like everyone else.

I am more afraid of being complacent.

After 9-11, I was like everyone else.

I was a flag-waving patriot. I thought al Qaeda did it, too.

I thought we should bomb the Arabs straight back to the stone age, just like everyone else did.

Bomb them straight to hell.

Then I read about John O'Neill.

Maverick counter-terrorism expert in the FBI.

O'Neill tracked Osama bin Laden since 1995.

He knew more about Osama than anyone in the world.

He tracked him past the Embassy bombings in 1998 and the Cole bombing in 2000.

http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=7038&name=Embassy-B...
http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=6764&name=USS-Cole

He knew more about Osama and al Qaeda than anyone in the world.

Isn't that interesting.

Then O'Neill got in some trouble.

His investigation into terrorism were blocked from up on high.

Blocked by whom?

In the summer of 2001, he resigned as Deputy Director of the FBI.

At the same time, he was publicly opposed to the anti-terrorism policies of President George W. Bush.

On September 10th, 2001, he started his new job,

with a company called Kroll Associates...

http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=6334&name=Kroll

As head of security at the World Trade Center.
A day later, he was dead.

http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=1506&id2=1708

A victim of the September 11th terrorist attacks.

He died at the World Trade Center. Come on!

The FBI's top counter-terrorism expert,

who after chasing bin Laden for six years happened to take a job in the private sector,

is murdered in an internationally-televised terrorist attack blamed on his arch nemesis?

Killed by his arch nemesis. How ironic.

Coincidence? Fate?

Or conspiracy?

Conspiracy!

Why did O'Neill start working at the Trade Center?

Why were his investigations into al Qaeda stopped?

Who arranged for him to get his new, ill-fated job?

I know the answers to these questions now.

And none of them have to do with Osama bin Laden.

The more you look at the whole, and not just the pieces...

- You don't know anything -

...the more you understand what really happened.

John O'Neill is the key. Look into John O'Neill.

Kroll Associates, Brian Jenkins, Jerome Hauer.

Look for John O'Neill. He is the key.

Michael Cherkasky, ever looked into the LAPD?

http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=6334&id2=7037

Why don't you go back to the FBI, Robert Mueller?

John O'Neill's investigations through the New York City offices of the FBI...

...were run in concert with the CIA.

The offices were in World Trade Center building number 7.

World Trade Center building number 7. Floors 23 through 26...

were the federal bunker offices...

of all the federal agencies in New York City.

Set up...

...by Jerome Hauer.

Jerome Hauer was the guy who got John O'Neill his job at the World Trade Center.

Who killed John O'Neill?

And why?

That's a very good question.

So who did kill John O'Neill?

To understand what happened to John O'Neill

you have to know what happened on 9/11.

I am prepared to listen.

Are you sure?

I am sure.

The CIA created Islamic Fundamentalism in 1979.

It was a way to draw the Soviet Union into a war with Afghanistan.

It gave the Soviets their Vietnam War.

It destroyed their economy and dispelled support of Communism.

It was a smart thing to do, wasn't it?

Not without a price.

During the war, the US, UK, and Pakistan all supported and groups of Arab fighters

known as the 'Mujahedeen'.

Two of these freedom-fighters were Ramzi Yousef,

and Osama bin Laden.

Books printed by the University of Nebraska

and paid for by the U.S. Department of Education

taught the Mujahedeen radical theories of Islam

and treated them to math problems and literature exercises riddled with allusions to

guns, bombs, tanks...

105
00:10:01,756 --> 00:10:05,171
Just overall, general killing. You know, they...

106
00:10:06,055 --> 00:10:09,475
They trained them to be violent,

107
00:10:09,476 --> 00:10:13,410
and then they wonder why they became terrorists.

http://politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=4497&id2=6593

But the Mujahideen had a lot of help to create this warrior culture in the school system from the United States, which paid for the Mujahideen propaganda in the textbooks. It was all part of American Cold War policy in the 1980s, helping the Mujahideen defeat the Soviet army on Afghan soil. The University of Nebraska was front and center in that effort. The university did the publishing and had an Afghan study center and a director who was ready to help defeat the "Red Menace."

I Saw it When it First Came Out

I was blown away with the quantity and quality of information that was packed into it.

I think it deserves a spot in a massive TRUTH Hall of Fame.

Not impatient

It's just that I'm not a native speaker of English.

I can understand the narration of a film like "Loose Change 9/11: The American Coup" without any problems, but not this one.

http://wkjo.com/subtitles/

http://wkjo.com/subtitles/

Transcript / Subtitles:

The following subtitles are currently available on both the NTSC and PAL versions of the DVD:

* Dutch : Download
* English : Download
* French : Download
* German : Download
* Italian : Download

The following subtitles will be added in the next release:

* Czech : Download
* Spanish : Download

Thanks to all who assisted in making "Who Killed John O'Neill?" an international dialogue.

Thanks...

It all helps build the case of unrealistic coincidences...

Kind regards John

what about Silverstein habits regarding his punctuality?

that would be an interesting part of his professionnal life to dig, and then compare with what happened to him on 911. Also, it would be interesting to know whether siverstein and co cancel meetings very often... or never... what kind of habits do the executives have within this company? I believe that he is the kind of guy who is absolutely and perfectly punctual, which would add to the oddity of all these fortunate excuses... a small/unformal inquiry within his offices could add an interesting inside view to the picture, couldn't it?

regards from France, and TY for your great job!
www.reopen911.info/news/

Silverstein will crumble

when light is shined upon him.

A fact less known

JP O'Neill, John O'Neill's first son, was sceduled to meet John at the morning on 9/11 to discuss important things (maybe career?) and was late, too.
No sinnister point here in running late, this meeting was sceduled later and the attack itself was the reason for the delay. It's mere the circumstance that such a meeting should take place too- I mean come on!
And please consider that John was security chief for three weeks, all the warnings signs, the raised awareness regarding terror- all the antiterror meetings he scheduled with his friends out of the branch, his comments the night before, I think he was onto something.

I have no source at hand, but I write a novel right now in german language with one story covering his expericences the days before and on 9/11 and am short before publishing. I've studied every detail in John's life. And did read this info in one of the 6 to 7 essays about the man who knew. Fair to say.

Different ways of spreading the message

are all beneficial. The film Who Killed John O'Neill was presented in arthouse fashion, especially at the beginning, but if you get past an MTV level of attention span, it was very informative and well done. There are lots of straight documentaries for those who prefer that. Thank you for posting this dialogue and accompanying citations as well as the translation downloads. As noted by the incomparable Kevin Ryan, the people noted here are a key link to whom was really on the inside of the foreknowledge component of this puzzle.