Tom,

 

I have just been reviewing your reports about the 1988 plan to take down the WTC and the cogent economic motivation behind this plan (in essence: the WTC had lost all economic feasibility and was a huge liability),

http://www.rense.com/general47/pulled.htm 

 

I find it remarkable that from the military side, similar plans were reportedly in the making even ten years before this, as just published by AFP/Rense for 1976,

http://www.rense.com/general63/TWIN.HTM

 

Ignoring older and relatively minor stuff, we can point out the key roadmarks to 9-11, namely:

- 1976 plan (which is not actually essential to understand the convolution, see next)

- 1988 plan (plus the economics and the cogent logics of destroying the WTC)

- the Feb. 1993 bombing of the WTC co-sponsored by funds and instructions from the FBI

- the April 1995 pineapple (mini-nuke) bombing at OK City, covered up in the days after the bombing

- the 9-11-1 plan implementation, including WTC7 insurance fraud (Silverstein, Blackstone Group, Kissinger, AIG, Carlyle Group)

 

Two strands of planning met in the 9-11-1 attacks. All evidence for Arab participation (except for window dressing) has fallen apart. Newspaper men and women who step forward claiming there is evidence have so far shown none. In two German trials, the U.S. government provided this much evidence for the alleged Arab participation: zip (zero). The reason: There is no such evidence. The FBI chief Robert Mueller III admitted as much in his speech before the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco back in 2002.

 

The theory that Arab terrorists perpetrated 9-11-1 is a piece of Oriental lore. That does not mean there is no explanation, of course:

 

About six weeks before 9-11-1, the insurance coverage for the towers was raised from $1.5 billion (had sufficed for two decades) to $5.05 billion, i.e. was more than trebled.

 

Example from law school: A farmer more than trebles the fire insurance for his barn. Then the barn burns down. The next morning, the police rings his doorbell to ask questions.

 

In a situation where the professor of real estate at NY University, Larry Silverstein, knew exactly what was known since 1988: The WTC was a huge liability for its demolitions costs around 2010 (ca. $20 billion). What motivated Silverstein to sign a 99 year lease in mid-2001 and assume these rebuilding costs? Answer: An intention to defraud the insurances. The courts recently awarded him $7 billion as a result of this strategizing, and he is sitting fat and squat, celebrating with his backers of the Blackstone Group: Henry Kissinger, Pete Petersen, Maurice "Hank" Greenberg, and their close associate the Carlyle Group (a key department of the Bush crime syndicate).

 

Lucky Larry: Only weeks after trebling the insurance, Arab terrorists blew up the entire array of buildings. Including Tower 7 where no plane ever hit and only minor fires burned. No highrise has ever fallen from fires except this Tower 7. Lease-holder Larry Silverstein admitted in a TV interview that the building was demolished (expression "pull it") on the afternoon of 9-11-1.

 

Fortunately for Larry, for the first time in the history of the WTC he was so foresightful to include the risk of terror attacks in his insurance coverage.

 

I remind here of the TV footage of at least two cruise missiles being fired into the site of WTC Tower 7 in the afternoon of 9-11-1 shortly before it collapsed,

http://www.gallerize.com/Missiles%20on%20the%20Morning%20of%209-11-1.htm 

 

Two questions:

 

1. Can Larry get over his grief by collecting $ 7 billion cash from the insurances (for "double terror attack" on his heavily insured towers)?

 

2. Do the insurance companies also have to pay for the cruise missiles that were shown on TV?

 

Nothing at all hard to understand about a plain vanilla insurance fraud, except the extent to which the military had its hand in it, for motives of its own. Kissinger and the (unfortunately I have to say this!) Zionist Neo-Cons orchestrated this in the weeks and months before 9-11-1 in lengthy negotiations. Condoleeza Rice lied about never having heard about an airplane threat to the WTC. Tenants and security guards of the former WTC report that since the construction of the WTC where were constant plans how to avoid an airplane hit in the towers, a fact that Rice conveniently swept under the carpet. Her lies stand out prominent for other reasons as well, too numerous to rehearse again here.

 

Criminal complaints if unsound are quickly "nol prossed" by the District Attorney. The citizens' complaint for the insurance fraud behind 9-11-1 apparently cannot be nol prossed since the complaint holds water. The Attorney General Eliot Spitzer is speculating to be hoisted to the seat of NY governor. His former law firm, Skadden Arps, has as one of its largest clients AIG, who is behind the fraud. So Spitzer is just sitting on his hands while the law rots.

 

I took the liberty to send this around to the whole group because I believe this is of key relevance to understand what 9-11-1 was and is about.

 

Stefan Grossmann

Frankfurt, Germany

 

  "Jean T Gordon" <jgordon@igc.org> schrieb: