I recently penned an article about Tucker Carlson’s musings over the mysterious collapse of Building 7.
Building 7, also known as the Salomon Brothers building, was not struck by an airplane or any such projectile that day. Nonetheless, it collapsed at free-fall speed neatly into its own footprint.
Anyone who’s ever seen a controlled demolition will recognize the kinetic pattern.
Predictably, I was attacked by a few disgruntled readers/trolls with the “conspiracy theorist” smear.
Fair enough. That 9/11 was either actively facilitated or passively allowed by the powers that be is a conspiracy theory, and it’s one that I subscribe to.
I bear the cross with joy.
Have such detractors ever sincerely grappled with the endless anomalies and curiosities surrounding the event?
For instance, Larry Silverstein, Building 7’s owner, admitted that he liaised with the New York Fire Department on 9/11 and they decided to “pull it… and then we watched the building go down.”
Here’s Larry Silverstein, then leaseholder of WTC7, re-telling of when he gave the order to “pull it,” meaning demolish the building. He would later claim that this was a mistake of wording. https://t.co/ChrI6E1ymU pic.twitter.com/rUYCaxpaD7
— Deeda Weeda aka DMAN (@DeemTheDreem) July 10, 2021
“I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I 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 we watched the building collapse,” Silverstein recalled.
“Fact check” organization Snopes later claimed that Silverstein actually meant “pull the firefighters out of the building.”
That’s plausible – super sketchy, but plausible. One would think he would have used the plural pronoun “them” as in “pull them,” but whatever.
Then there’s the spectacle of the BBC reporting that Building 7 – which, again, was not struck by any projectile – had collapsed a full twenty minutes prior to its actual collapse. You can actually see Building 7 in the background of the New York skyline during the report.
How curious, indeed, if not dispositive of malfeasance. It won’t be enough to dissuade the skeptics, who swallowed the government line, from their reflexive trust in the authorities’ version of events. They’re impervious to persuasion.
We should probably expect, then, that they will also willfully ignore the recent bombshell court filing that implicates the CIA in the attacks.
Via The Gray Zone:
“A newly-released court filing raises grave questions about the relationship between Alec Station, a CIA unit set up to track Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden and his associates, and two 9/11 hijackers leading up to the attacks, which was subject to a coverup at the highest levels of the FBI…
The filing is a 21-page declaration by Don Canestraro, a lead investigator for the Office of Military Commissions, the legal body overseeing the cases of 9/11 defendants…
When originally released in 2021 on the Office’s public court docket, every part of the document was redacted except an “unclassified” marking. Given its explosive contents, it is not difficult to see why: as Canestraro’s investigation concluded, at least two 9/11 hijackers had been recruited either knowingly or unknowingly into a joint CIA-Saudi intelligence operation which may have gone awry.”
The article is labyrinthine in its details. It painstakingly documents the process by which these pair of hijackers were identified by US intelligence in Kuala Lumpur while at an al-Quaeda summit, subsequently put on a flight to LA, bypassing customs scrutiny, handed an apartment (the CIA paying for the lease), and then potentially groomed to carry out the 9/11 attack.
Read the court filing in its entirety.
The facts of Alec Station and its potential grooming of two 9/11 hijackers are obscured by heavy bureaucratic redaction of relevant documents and FBI-vs-CIA infighting. We may never know the full extent of the CIA’s relationship with these figures.
There are, indeed, many unanswered questions about the cozy ties between the Deep State and the Saudis as it relates to their activities preceding and following the attacks.
In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, while the FAA had the entire US airspace locked down, US intelligence whisked several prominent Saudis, including members of the bin Laden clan, out of the country.
Via LA Times:
“It began with a chartered flight from Tampa, Fla., to Lexington, Ky., on Sept. 13. Soon there were at least eight planes stopping in 12 U.S. cities to fly Saudis out. About two dozen passengers were related to Bin Laden. Because of the lockdown, the initial flight required authorization from the highest levels of government — and specifically from the White House.”
No member of the Bush administration or the permanent Deep State bureaucracy has ever been made to answer under oath for going out of their way to evacuate these people. Why wouldn’t they have been kept inside the country for interrogation?
We have overwhelming circumstantial evidence – not limited to that which has been laid out here — that elements of the US government were involved in the biggest terrorist attack in American history.
We also have motive.
Project For a New American Century was a neoconservative think tank comprised of future leaders in the Bush administration, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz.
As its magnum opus, the group produced a 1997 document outlining its lofty geopolitical ambitions called “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”.
In it, they recognized that ramping up America’s already-bloated military budget and instigating foreign wars would be a hard sell without sufficient justification.
“This process of transformation is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor,” they wrote.
A few short years later, with PNAC’s members installed in the highest levels of the Bush administration cabinet, they got their “catastrophic and catalyzing event.”
What blissful serendipity! What a fortuitous turn of fate!
The only piece of evidence we don’t have is the proverbial smoking gun, like a full-throated admission from one of the attack’s architects regarding the US government’s complicity.
Unfortunately, such conclusive evidence may never be forthcoming, so you can put the puzzle pieces together however you will.
As for me, the “conspiracy theory” smear is a badge of honor.
Ben Bartee is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs.
Insta-tip jar and Bitcoin public address: bc1qvq4hgnx3eu09e0m2kk5uanxnm8ljfmpefwhawv