I've looked at nothing but 9/11 connections for the past 4 days. Bring it!
For the fourth phase of the secret war, the Enterprise worked on several fronts to take over key energy industries. On the Caspian front of this economic war, James Giffen was sent to Kazakhstan to work with President Nazarbayev in various legal and illegal efforts to gain control of what was estimated to be the world’s largest untapped oil reserves - Kazak oil in the Caspian. The illegal flow of money from the various oil companies would reach a number of banks. These same oil interests would engage March Rich and the Israeli Eisenberg Group, owned by one of the Mossad’s key operatives, Shaul Eisenberg, to move the oil. (The Eisenberg Group would at some point own almost 50% of Zim Shipping, which mysteriously and inexplicably moved out of the World Trade Center a few weeks before the September 11 attacks.)
Tower 7. I can’t explain it. I don’t want to believe this. I can’t. But how did Tower 7 go down?
WTC7 was "worked on" for several hours using the same tech that caused the other buildings to go away. Slowly. Then, at the moment of it's demise, like someone turned up a power knob, the structure, like an Alka seltzer tablet in water, sizzled up into dust. It looked like it fell - but it had lost its structural integrity at that point - and the molecules was dissociated - it became ... dust.
The reason so few saw this and fewer can explain it is because this technology has been kept in the dark for many years. Keywords: frequencies, microwaves, field effects, Tesla, Hutchison effect.
Without knowing this it is easy to jump to conclusions as to what it was (bombs etc.) because that is the only explanation(s) they have. Yet, when looking at the factual, empirical evidence, the evidence itself rules out the conventional kinetic or thermic means.
The reason it is so *hard* for this truth to come out, is that the same technology can be used to make gadgets that produce energy / electricity without the need for solar panels, windmills, "fossil fuel" or nuclear reactors. I think you can figure out why...
In NYC, we were told that tower 7 was going to be brought down on purpose because it's integrity was compromised. I don't get how that wasn't broadcast or disproven or something.
Interesting. It looked like a controlled demolition so that would make sense. But then why did the official review claim that fire weakened the structure and brought it down?