Westfield's role in the 9/11 conspiracy

[Ameridansk]

Of course, you all know about this, the lease that made Larry Silverstein the luckiest developer in history, right?:

http://www.cnn.com/2001/BUSINESS/asia/09/12/aust.westfi... /

<SNIP>

WTC leased to Silverstein, Westfield

<SNIP>
Silverstein Properties president Larry Silverstein said in July when he took the lease in partnership with Westfield America CEO Peter Lowy that it had been a career ambition to own the World Trade Center.

Lowy called it a thrill to invest "in this great city".
In a statement Wednesday, Westfield Holdings said the company was shocked at the events in the U.S. It said of the 10 Westfield staff working in the building, one of its executives was unaccounted for.
It also said Westfield America Trust's investment in the retail component of the World Trade Center was "fully insured for both capital and loss of income."

"The insurance cover includes acts of terrorism," it said.
<SNIP>

However, guess where seemingly harmless Westfield also finds itself:

http://www.westfield.com/corporate/retailer/us/airportr... /

<SNIP>
Westfield currently manages the retail concessions at:
§ Boston-Logan International Airport
§ George Bush Houston Intercontinental Airport
§ Newark International Airport
§ Orlando International Airport
§ Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport
§ San Antonio International Airport
§ Washington Dulles International Airport
<SNIP>

Wait a minute! That’s every airport involved on September 11th!

Even Reagan National where the remotely flown passenger jet, that everyone saw spiraling down toward the Pentagon just before the missile was fired causing the explosion everyone assumed was caused by the plane, landed.

Notice the one runway on this map pointing at the Pentagon:




The plane would have been headed right for that runway if by chance it had not hit the Pentagon. It could have landed there in seconds after passing over the Pentagon while everyone's attention was on the explosion and all the noise. How many eyewitnesses said it looked like the plane was coming in for a routine landing? A bunch.
How could any plane use that runway without flying directly over the Pentagon?

Did you know that the FBI believed there was another hijacking attempt on 9/11 that they foiled? It was from San Antonio (where Westfield is also present).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1551873.stm

<SNIP>
The authorities also believe they may have foiled an attempt to hijack a United Airlines flight from San Antonio in Texas to Denver, Colorado.
<SNIP>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/september11/story/0,11209,601...

<SNIP>
As the largest investigation in criminal history entered its second week, the bureau said it was considering whether a fifth suicide hijacking was foiled by the cancellation of a flight from Boston to Los Angeles.

American Airlines flight 43 was cancelled at the last minute last Tuesday because of technical problems. The FBI is using passenger lists in a bid to track down passengers with Arab names who did not fly on when commercial flights resumed last week.

There is also growing evidence that a sixth attack was planned, and that a cell of terrorists was intending to hijack a flight due to leave San Antonio last weekend.
<SNIP>

Here’s a little fun fact. On September 11th, Westfield only controlled 6 airport retail plazas.

Their plaza at George Bush Houston Intercontinental Airport is a new addition, given to them in 2003!

http://www.houstonairportsystem.org/news/?id=112

The other airport is in Florida, but there aren't any connections between Bush and Florida I can think of, however.

Still, whole lotta coinky-dinks, ay?

This was posted in another thread but I REALLY wanted to share.

[democraticinsurgent]

1. tin foil recepters open

very good find. coincidence is where it starts. the silverstein deal has always failed the smell test. extending their influence to the airports involved is quite intriguing.

i don't know that much about airports. could owning the retail concessions provide a big opportunity for compromising security, or not?

if not, well, one would have to consider CIA or Octopus involvement here.

Or, maybe it's just a coincidence. Like everything else that helped build the yellow brick road for the cavemen.

[Ameridansk]

3. All I can really say. . .

is that it provides a safe base of operations for any necessary conspirators at all airports involved. This would generally be considered invaluable, I'd think. You'd think that a command center would be necessary to handle any complications that would arise, no?

With the hundreds of airports all across the country, the fact that the same company who benefits mightily from the destruction of the WTC has only six airport retail plazas, and at least 3, possibly 4 or 5 of them are involved in the "attacks" is pretty amazing.

Silverstein was both a director of Westfield,

http://www.emporis.com/en/bu/sk/wt/cp/if/si/

and the CIA's landlord at World Trade Center Seven (strangely named since it was built in 1985 during the behind the scenes reign of GHWB)

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1104-04.htm

<SNIP>
The C.I.A.'s undercover New York station was in the 47-story building at 7 World Trade Center, one of the smaller office towers destroyed in the aftermath of the collapse of the twin towers that morning. All of the agency's employees at the site were safely evacuated soon after the hijacked planes hit the twin towers, the officials said.
<SNIP>

On edit: Someone please help me find an online copy of this article!

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22The+serendipitous+quality+of+life%22+lust&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&filter=0

It used to be easy to find and these are the last traces of it. I have a hard copy of it, but it is MUCH MORE USEFUL when it can pe found on the internet. It's from the Washington Post, and I'm sure Silverstein wishes it had never been printed.

[democraticinsurgent]

4. good logic, for sure

another dot for the coloring book. the picture's getting pretty clear as far as i'm concerned.

[Ameridansk]

11. Silverstein: "That morning was the serendipitous quality of life"

>>He {Silverstein}will only talk a little about "that morning," Sept. 11.

"That morning," he offers, "was the serendipitous quality of life."<<

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:tWBBdOLfy9UJ:hughhewitt.com/past_news_links_11.02/11.20.02.At_Ground_Zero.html+%22The+serendipitous+quality+of+life%22+lust&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&strip=1

What is the negative aspect of that quote? There ain't none. This article does a good job of showing how giddy Silverstein is that he will live his real dream of building the tallest building in the world in New York. Of course, that is not the intention of the article, however.

[Abe Linkman]

2. Excellent information, superior analysis, devastatingly presented.

Larry "Pull it" Silverstein may well be luckier than the little-noted
"investors" who shorted AA & UA in the days just preceding the Really Big Show.

Speaking of the UA & AA investors, it was reported in today's news that
the 9/11 Commission found that the "terrorists did not make investments in airline stocks just prior to 9/11". I think we all knew they'd get to the bottom of THAT potentially explosive issue. I don't know about you, but I thought for sure it was Hani Hanjour and the boys who had played the market so shrewdly. If the Commission says they didn't, I'll take their word on it. ( uh, no. no, apparently they didn't look to see WHO WAS behind the investments. they just cleared a few people that no one ever suspected in the first place.)

Thanks for another very impressive post.

[NecessaryOnslaught]

5. From the "aint worth the paper it's printed on" department

A post over in GD claims that Philip Zelikow said the Odigo warnings were found to be an "urban legend". :eyes:

[NecessaryOnslaught]

6. and from the steaming pile of horse manure department

SEC Says No Trading Linked To September 11 Terrorist Attack

Special to EconomicBriefing.com July 22, 2004- In conjunction with the release today of the final report by The National Commission On Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (the 9-11 Commission),the Securities and Exchange Comission has released comments stating that on Sept. 12, 2001, the SEC began an investigation to determine whether there was evidence that anyone who had advance knowledge of the terrorist attacks on September 11 sought to profit from that knowledge by trading in United States securities markets.

In the course of that review, the SEC stated that, they did not develop any evidence suggesting that anyone who had advance knowledge of the September 11 attacks traded on the basis of that information.

http://www.economicbriefing.com/level2/sec9-11investigation.html

[Ameridansk]

9. SEC was a Seven World Trade center tenant.

From this article:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1104-04.htm

<snip>
The agency's (CIA) New York station was behind the false front of another federal organization, which intelligence officials requested that The Times not identify.
<snip>

From this article:

http://www.investigatemagazine.com/_NEWSTALK/000000b1.htm

<SNIP>
The firm used to place the "put options" on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency.
<SNIP>

Could the SEC and the CIA be that close?

[midwayer]

12. Put options

Investigaton Summary written in 2002

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/HEN204B.html


Just of note I remember Paul Bremer was once a big wig at MMC

Analysts also noted that though the insurance sector was one of the strongest in a depressed stock market, there were huge spikes in put options in Marsh & McLennan and in Citigroup. Marsh & McLennan, the biggest insurance broker, was a World Trade Center tenant with 1,700 employees. It also saw, next to UAL, the highest spike in put options; thus you have a confluence of facts that, in the minds of many experienced traders and experts, amounts to unequivocal evidence of foul play. Clearly traders placed bets based on sure-fire insider prior knowledge. The odds against this happening randomly or coincidentally are astronomical; probably incalculable.

[Abe Linkman]

7. I'm shocked, SHOCKED. bolo, merc, vv --- can't you refute ANY of this?

Is your silence consent?

[objection]

13. Are you completely stupid?

Work it out for yourself.

Spoof truth says for instance that "The plane would have been headed right for that runway"

Spoof truth, jowever, would also have it that his plane passed over the Navy Annex ("Fort Myer") and over the Pentagon. He's given you the map. Plot the path. Right for the runway? You tell us.

You may also have noticed a number of witnesses who remarked that the undercarriage and the flaps were not down. Is that making any kind of sense?

Spoof truth also asks "How many eyewitnesses said it looked like the plane was coming in for a routine landing?".

Go count them. Read what they really said. Nobody saw the B757 beyond the Pentagon wall that it hit. Nobody at all. Not one. The notion is a total fabrication designed to distract and confuse.

[MercutioATC]

16. I can't reply to EVERYBODY who doesn't understand the issues involved.

Assume for a moment that AAL77 DID overfly the Pentagon. There's ZERO possibility it could have landed at Reagan unnoticed. I'd like to hear anybody's explanation of how that happened.

So, now we're back to the beginning. Even if you claim that all the crash evidence (black boxes, wheel, landing gear, DNA) at the Pentagon was planted, you still have AAL77 (or at least a 757) seen at the Pentagon with no resolution to where it went.

It didn't land at Reagan.

[Abe Linkman]

17. How do you know FL 77 didn't land at Reagan Int'l?

Look at the map provided. The flyover was in a direct line to land at Reagan.

The problem you have is that you're an unconvincing apologist for a Fairy Tale. If you were here to learn the truth about what really happened on 9/11, the idea that FL 77 landed at Reagan would be very plausible to you.

[MercutioATC]

18. There's no record of it landing there and it didn't "sneak" in.

Reagan may have been along its path of flight before the crash, but there's no way it landed there without anybody noticing.

If you disagree, give me one scenario where AAL77 could have avoided detection by tower and ground controllers (not to mention other pilots and airport personnel) and landed at Reagan (and subsequently disappeared).

[Abe Linkman]

19. Who says it WASN'T "noticed"?

There are lots of scenarios for FL 77 landing at Reagan on 9/11. I don't know for certain that it did land there, but it wouldn't surprise me. I'm not even sure that the plane which overflew the Pentagon WAS FL 77. FL 77 may have landed in WV and the plane that flew over the Pentagon may have been an empty 757. I agree with those who say that a large airliner flew over the Pentagon (as part of the plot), but I don't claim to know anything more about it.

The one thing that IS certain, is that NO large airliner crashed at the Pentagon.

[MercutioATC]

20. Believe what you want, but that's not the way it works.

Suggesting that AAL77 landed at Reagan shows a profound ignorance of the way ATC works. I really should have stopped wasting my time days ago when you cited Dick Eastman (who can't even manage to present a theory without HUGE conflicting issues within his own argument).

[Abe Linkman]

21. I don't need your permission. That IS the way it works.

I really should have stopped trying to reason with you a long time ago, whenever it became obvious that you are not here as an objective seeker of truth. You have a different reason for being here. You even come across like a semi-professional PR flack who was sent to do the impossible task of trying to fool a large group of intelligent people into believing the lies of the Official "Cavemen Did It" Conspiracy Theory of 9/11. That's a pretty arrogant attitude. I hope you aren't evaluated by your wife, mother, children, co-workers or boss --- on the results you've obtained. Not that your efforts are deserving of high marks, but at least you show up for work most days.

[MercutioATC]

22. My MOTHER??? If I WAS some "disinfo agent", why would my MOTHER

evaluate me?

Abe, the only thing you know about ATC is what I've told you. Even then, you choose to disregard the facts when they don't mesh with your "conspiracy theory of the week".

If you have ANY theory of how AAL77 could have landed at Reagan without it being known, please share. I'd LOVE to hear it.

[k-robjoe]

8. Thanks for the post

Why would the hijackers hijack planes out of Boston to hit targets in N.Y?

Somehow this question comes to mind again, reading your post.

[Ameridansk]

10. Why Boston?

Because the Boston FBI was dirty. Why else would Bush do this?

Remember this?:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1214-01.htm

<SNIP>
Published on Friday, December 14, 2001 in the Boston Globe

Bush Halts Inquiry of FBI and Stirs Up a Firestorm
by Glen Johnson

WASHINGTON - President Bush yesterday invoked executive privilege to block a congressional subpoena exploring abuses in the Boston FBI office, prompting the chairman of a House committee to lambaste his fellow Republicans and triggering what one congressman said is the start of ''a constitutional confrontation.''
<SNIP>

Reciprocal back scratching at it's finest.

[Dancing_Dave]

14. Thanks for the nice summery!

The thing about this which always has struck me as most strange is that the 9/11 cover-up hasn't broken down in New York City long before now. SO many people there have experiences which show the official version to be bogus. And the Bush Administration isn't trusted at all in NYC.

It may all unravel in a big way by the third anniversery of 9/11 yet. Something has got to give.

[Abe Linkman]

15. Conspiracy Theory or Conspiracy FACT?

The evidence continues to pile up. 9/11 was an inside job. And, THAT'S a conspiracy FACT, Jack.