[Testifying before a congressional inquiry] Gene Corley of the American Society of Civil Engineers, said the Port Authority [of New York and New Jersey] refused to hand over blueprints for the twin towers - crucial for evaluating the wreckage - until he signed a waiver saying his team would not use the plans in a lawsuit against the agency [that is, against FEMA]. - New York Daily News, 2002-03-07
Was this because a close examination of the blueprints might reveal clues that the Twin Towers had been engineered to make possible a controlled demolition? And that FEMA (the Federal Emergency Management Agency) was aware of this?
Since it was this very same FEMA which took charge of the "investigation" into the WTC collapse (and is about to release a report claiming that the fires caused the collapse) one might be forgiven for suspecting that their "investigation" has been something less than an unbiased attempt to discover the truth of what happened.
Assume now, for the sake of argument, that a "fail-safe" mechanism as described above was actually engineered into the Twin Towers (probably in the mid- 1990s). The explanation given above, of the collapse of the Twin Towers, still leaves open one important question: Did those who demolished the Twin Towers on the morning of September 11th plan in advance to do so? Did they have prior knowledge of the plan to strike the towers and was the controlled demolition of the Twin Towers (and the deaths of thousands of people in the buildings) already planned by the perpetrators of the attacks and those who assisted them?
Given the existence of the fail-safe mechanism, a small number of people would have known about it, including officials at FEMA and possibly including the most senior members of the Manhattan business community (especially if such a mechanism was there to persuade them to remain in Manhattan). Even though this mechanism was presumably built in to the Twin Towers hoping it would never be used, some people would know that it was there and that it could be used - provided one had the authority to initiate the demolition procedure and an arguably sufficient reason to exercise that authority.
Who had such authority? Presumably the owners of the World Trade Center (though perhaps they could not have pushed the button without first obtaining permission from FEMA).
Most of the World Trade Center changed hands in a $3.2 billion, 99-year lease deal that was concluded only seven weeks before the attack; with a sweetheart tax deal and new insurance covering buildings and rents - payable to new beneficiaries. - The Blockbuster
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey signed the deal with the Silverstein-led Westfield America on the 26th April, 2001. Westfield America leased the concourse mall, and [Larry] Silverstein the office portion.
The deal was finalized and celebrated on the 23rd July - just seven weeks before almost the entire complex was destroyed. Port Authority officers gave a giant set of keys to the complex to Silverstein and to Westfield CEO Lowy.
Silverstein was ecstatic at that time. "This is a dream come true," he had said. "We will be in control of a prized asset, and we will seek to develop its potential, raising it to new heights." An ironic choice of words, in retrospect. - The Blockbuster
The "arguably sufficient reason" was provided by the impacts and the subsequent structural damage and fire. According to this scenario, then, the purpose of the impacts was not themselves to destroy the Twin Towers but rather to provide the "justification" for detonating the explosives which brought them down in a controlled demolition.
FEMA -The
Secret Government
We arrived on, uh, late Monday night [September 10th] and went into action on Tuesday morning [September 11th]; and not until today did we get a full opportunity to work, uh, the entire site. -Tom Kenny (FEMA), speaking to CBS anchor Dan Rather on September 12th.
7. The Perpetrators
The person who, shortly after the attacks on the WTC, was announced as "the prime suspect" (without any evidence), and quickly promoted to "the mastermind behind the attacks", was Usama bin Laden, who has made no secret of his animosity toward the U.S. for its support and funding of Israel's brutality toward the Palestinians, for what he sees as the Americans' defilement of Saudi Arabia (the location of two of the three holiest Islamic sites), the continued bombing of Iraq and the Americans' support of the (as he sees them) apostate regimes of Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The contempt with which the U.S. is regarded by many Arab organizations (not to mention many non-Arab organizations), and the involvement of Arabs in the ineffective bombing of the WTC in 1993, means that Arabs are automatically suspected in any terrorist attack against the U.S. (as they were in the Oklahoma City Bombing until the government announced that Timothy McVeigh was the culprit).
Within hours of the attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon Dan Rather and other mainstream media whores were quoting unidentified "government sources" as stating that Usama bin Laden was the culprit. As the WTC bombers intended, most Americans immediately believed this claim and continue to regard him as the perpetrator of this atrocity and the entire Arab world as their enemy (a reaction welcomed by many in Israel). Many people in Arab countries also believe he did it because for them Usama bin Laden personifies the resentment against American exploitation of the Third World which they themselves feel. But Usama bin Laden has never said that he was behind the September 11th attack, and, indeed, has explicitly denied this.
Cont ...