2004 Presidential Candidate Says Weakened Building Was Brought Down Based on Danger Posed to Surroundings
Aaron Dykes / JonesReport | April 22, 2007
Senator John Kerry was questioned concerning 9/11 during an appearance at Book People in Austin, Texas. Members of Austin 9/11 Truth Now asked Kerry about the officially unexplained collapse of WTC Building 7."
Kerry responded:
"I do know that that wall, I remember, was in danger and I think they made the decision based on the danger that it had in destroying other things-- that they did it in a controlled fashion."
Download video!
This matches statements by leaseholder Larry Silverstein regarding the collapse of WTC7 where he said. "We've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse."
Furthermore, hundreds of police, fireman and other first responders have gone public reporting being informed of Building 7's controlled demolition prior to the building collapse, negating the government's official story that building collapse was due to fire.
Additionally, an EMT, who recently went public only under the name 'Mike', said that hundreds of emergency rescue personnel were told over bullhorns that Building 7 was about to be "pulled" and that a 20 second radio countdown preceded its collapse.
The BBC and CNN also both reported the collapse of Building 7 more than twenty minutes before it actually fell. The misreporting not only stands out as a glaring error-- with the WTC 7 building still visibly standing in the background of the shot, but begs the question: how did BBC, BBC 24 and CNN all know in advance that Building 7 would collapse, when no steel building has ever collapsed from fires alone?
Official reports from both NIST and FEMA state that they cannot explain why Building 7 fell, but maintain that it was related to a terrorist attack on the complex on 9/11. However, the FEMA report concludes that:
"The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. The best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue."
A report by NIST regarding the collapse of Building 7 is officially underway, but such a report has yet to be published.
The 9/11 Commission Report makes no mention of WTC 7 whatsoever.
Senator John Kerry needs to disclose how he "knew" WTC 7 was brought down in a "controlled fashion" and who told him so. The official government story states no reason for the WTC 7 collapse. If Sen. Kerry has other information, he owes it to the victims, the families, who have been repeatedly lied to, and to the country at large to come forward with details that could answer outstanding questions.
Preparing to demolish even a moderate sized building takes weeks of preparation; a building as large as WTC 7-- a 47- story skyscraper-- must have taken at least as long. Therefore, the idea that the building was demolished in response to fires spread from the Twin Towers is not a satisfactory response, as the building could not have been set up for unexpected demolition in only a few hours, much less while fires burned inside.
Kerry was also asked about the research of Dr. Steven Jones, who has tested both samples of steel from the Twin Towers as well as recovered dust, which have both been tested positive for the chemical signature of Thermate, which is used to cut support beams in localized reactions during a controlled demolition.
Kerry stated that he was not aware of the research and is "open to hearing anything based in fact and evidence."
----------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT
Kerry was asked about an investigation into WTC7 and the connection with leasehold Larry Silverstein who publicly stated that the "decision was made to pull it," a term that refers to controlled demolition:
"I don't believe there's been a formal investigation. I haven't heard that; I don't know that. I do know that that wall, I remember, was in danger and I think they made the decision based on the danger that it had in destroying other things-- that they did it in a controlled fashion. You know he's part of the construction-- effort for the memorial and the use of the land, etc. There's been a long tug-of-war going on in New York and I've not been following every aspect of it because it's not in my jurisdiction, so to speak. But I'll check on the story-- I'll take a look at it based on what you've said. You're the first people anywhere in the country who've brought this to my attention
