London high-rise fire conspiracy: The 9/11 connection

By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor

I published an article here yesterday about various suspicious aspects of the Grenfell Tower fire:

False flag tower “collapse” alert, re: London high rise fire 

But I didn’t really explore the million dollar question: Cui bono? Who benefits? It turns out that like the Twin Towers and the rest of the World Trade Center complex prior to 9/11,  Grenfell Tower may have been worth a whole lot more money destroyed than standing.

Grenfell Tower was full of poor and working people, with a high proportion of immigrants. Gentrifying forces are moving into the area, and the real estate sharks want the poor people (and the older buildings) gone.

 

The Grenfell Tower atrocity thus appears to have been another real estate scam, like 9/11, presumably perpetrated by the same general forces, if not the same actual criminal gang.

9/11 as real estate scam

Prior to 9/11, the World Trade Center Towers were condemned for asbestos. A court decision mandated that the Port Authority remove the asbestos that coated the steel frame members. That would have cost billions, perhaps double-digit billions – far more than the buildings were worth, since they had high vacancy rates, antiquated communications infrastructure, and were generally regarded as white elephants that the the City had been trying to get rid of for many years.

Then a good samaritan – a reputed organized crime figure who had made his fortune in the sex industry – purchased the World Trade Center in July, 2001, and doubled the terrorism insurance. That good samaritan, a certain Mr. Larry Silverstein – a close friend of Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu –missed his usual breakfast at the top of the North Tower on the morning of 9/11/2001 because his wife reminded him about an appointment with the dermatologist. (His daughter made similar excuses for staying away that morning.) Silverstein hit the jackpot when the white elephant buildings were all demolished with explosives. He sued for double indemnity, on the basis that he had been “victimized” by two separate and unrelated terror attacks (the two planes that served as misdirection for the explosives) and got it, walking away with over five billion dollars in cash, plus rights to rebuild, on his roughly 15 million dollar investment.

So what kind of people run real estate scams in New York and London? Could it be the same kind of people who use false flag terror to demonize Muslims and mass-murder them (32 million since 9/11) in wars aimed at destroying Israel’s enemies?

Gilad Atzmon has aptly remarked that the List of 100 Worst Landlords in New York reads like a Bar Mitzvah guest list. (The #1 name is Silverstein, possibly a relation of Larry’s.)

Gilad once told me an interesting story about how easy it was for him to leave Israel and settle in London, even though he had very little money. Gilad plugged into the local Jewish network, which found him an extremely lucrative position in a big London real estate operation. Gilad’s job, as I recall, involved using statistics to find undervalued properties, which would then be bought up and monetized (in many cases, one assumes, by forcing out the poor people and gentrifying the properties.) Gilad said he quickly found himself making ridiculous amounts of money through this ridiculously easy “ethnic network” sinecure – so much money that it was a threat to his soul. So he quit in order to “keep it real.”

It is palpably obvious that the Kosher Nostra (or a faction thereof) played a major role in 9/11, and the lead role in the World Trade Center demolitions.

Did another faction just burn down Grenfell Tower?

 

 

 

Related Posts:



The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT, VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. LEGAL NOTICE - COMMENT POLICY

Posted by on June 15, 2017, With 12011 Reads Filed under Investigations. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Comments Closed

19 Responses to "London high-rise fire conspiracy: The 9/11 connection"

  1. rebelofoz  June 17, 2017 at 8:11 pm

    But seriously, isn’t it obvious that 911 was one of those “magic is real, miracles happen” Jew-magic kind of events?! Just imagine, how can over 100 floors of steal, class, concrete, including furnishing and fittings fall into their footprint and turning, in 8.4 seconds, into dust?! Puff! All gone!

  2. JohninMK  June 16, 2017 at 3:42 pm

    It looks increasingly like this event has nothing to do with 9/11. A fridge freezer failed and caught fire causing a chain reaction as I described below. The building was clad in, banned in the US/Germany as a fire risk, panels that were not fire proofed at a saving that could be as low as £5000. A local authority screw-up.

    Rather than terrorism, the underlying cause is actually Global Warming/Climate Change and the reduce CO2 mantra. This has forceded authorities to insulate their buildings, they never cared about the heat loses of these almost uninsulated buildings till now, against a lowest cost possible budget target.

  3. wiggins  June 16, 2017 at 9:44 am

    Correct me if I’m wrong…but doesn’t ‘Lucky’ Larry own the lease on the new WTC?

  4. Aziz Khalfan  June 16, 2017 at 2:35 am

    Who’s Afraid of James Wesley Howell?

    https://www.henrymakow.com/2017/06/James-Wesley-Howell-Our-fate.html

    • martsiva  June 16, 2017 at 5:31 pm

      Thanx Aziz. I just brought this up here on VT a few days ago.

  5. JohninMK  June 15, 2017 at 3:38 pm

    The block is owned by the Westminister City Council. So no private landlord but the council could have sold some of the flats in it, I don’t know. Another 4000 UK tower blocks are now being checked.

    It looks like the fire could well have spread so quickly as the new cladding on the outside included 6″ of inflammable foam and a 2″ air gap plus new windows, probably plastic as most are now in the UK. So as the fire caught hold in a flat, possibly a faulty electrical device, it melted the windows allowing the fire outside into the cladding and as it went up the building with the built in air ducts it in turn melted windows allowing the fire inside again into other flats. Domestic fires don’t come any worse than this. Only a sprinkler system in the flats could have stopped this.

    • JohninMK  June 16, 2017 at 3:12 am

      Ooops, correction. The building is owned by Kensington and Chelsea Council. Sorry for the error.

  6. Eduardo  June 15, 2017 at 3:17 pm

    Looks like with lease contracts the “chosen people” can make more profits then with the real estate itself through insurance. Buddies Silverstein & Lowry & Co know how to squeeze a lemon.
    http://crimesofzion.blogspot.com/2007/05/frank-lowy-zionism-and-911.html

  7. David Odell  June 15, 2017 at 2:24 pm

    Just one of the many reasons insurance is a bad idea. Overall, the financial sense of it, only applies if there is a payout at some point. If someone was cold hearted enough to actually burn the building in the middle of the night, it still makes no sense to me. The backlash on this one is going to be different and if someone thought they would just do it and get away with it, they won’t.
    The payoff for 9/11 was much more than the building insurance. This does not compare.
    That the cladding was approved for use, is itself, a crime.

  8. guibus  June 15, 2017 at 2:12 pm

    grenfell = greenfeld ? yes, should Kosher nostra related !

    • kaho  June 15, 2017 at 6:02 pm

      Grenfell is a name that was carried to England in the great wave of migration from Normandy following the Norman Conquest of 1066. The Grenfell family lived in one of the many places named Grenville in Normandy.

      Grenfell cloth is also a very famous fabric for outdoor use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grenfell_Cloth

  9. jimmy wotnot  June 15, 2017 at 12:58 pm

    As yet, no collapse.

    Did the explosives not detonate, or do the Brits just build better tower buildings?

    Or was 9/11 a scam?

    • Kevin Barrett  June 15, 2017 at 2:05 pm

      Steel frame high rises do not collapse from fires. Never have, never will.

    • Ian Greenhalgh, Managing Editor  June 15, 2017 at 3:58 pm

      Not unless you nuke ’em 😉

    • Kareem Salessi  June 15, 2017 at 8:56 pm

      Absolutely true gentlemen, just as I proved it with numbers in my recently published working paper “Solving 9/11 Enigma”, a short description of which I posted under comments in this Veterans Today Alexis article:

      http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/05/25/americans-rise-against-fake-news/

      Federal court documents to which “Solving 9/11 Enigma” was an exhibit, in the “Muslim Ban case”, are linked at the bottom of the page.
      That “Washington v. Trump case” was recently decided against President Trump, just as the one in the Virginia federal appellate court was.

      The U.S. Supreme Court will likely reject the White House request to hear its appeals against those decision, and thus the related Executive Order (EO) will be permanently enjoined and banned from enforcement, just as it already is.

    • Eddie Devere  June 16, 2017 at 4:54 pm

      KB – I think you’ll find Jimmy was being ironic.

    • Kareem Salessi  June 19, 2017 at 8:35 pm

      Direct link to “Solving 9/11 Enigma”: https://kareemsalessi.com/solving-911-enigma/

      “Solving 9/11 Enigma” likely answers every open-minded reader’s 9/11 questions, and/or confusions.

      The substantive guidance for “Solving 9/11 Enigma” was from Veterans Today articles and readers, as reflected in the working-paper, and in its court filings. 

      It is noteworthy that neither the plaintiffs (state governments/DOJs), nor the defendants (The White House/ US-DOJ), filed oppositions to my documented facts, including the fact that WTCs had indeed been nuked on 9/11/2001. 
      In general, in USA courts, when facts are requested to be judicially taken notice of, if the requests are unopposed with the filing of an “Opposition to Request for Judicial Notice”, then those facts must be deemed true, and accepted by the court as true facts, by the court’s granting the Requests for Judicial Notice (RJN).
      However, in this case, despite the absence of oppositions to my RJN, the Washington court denied the RJN outright, as shown in the four court documents linked below the article.
      The 9th circuit, did not even file my RJN, despite my express permission from that court prior to filing it!
       
      Per my personal experience, USA courts play deceptive roles of “Controlled Opposition Under the Color of Law”, quite similar to the deceptive roles that many non-MSM routinely play, “under the color of peoples’ media”. 
      Thank you

    • mb.  July 8, 2017 at 4:13 am

      Is there any proof of nukes on 9-11 ? The explanation of Dr Judy Wood makes more sense and suits the events better.

    • Kareem Salessi  July 10, 2017 at 7:12 pm

      Many such comics have existed and died off, including the BBC comic of building fatigue reported by BBC to have caused WTC-7 to collapse, although reported long before its occurrence!

      That viral BBC video which had been saved, and posted, by many people on internet, has been aggressively removed years later!

      Basically said: If you understand that one golf ball needs 1.5 tons of thrust-force to fly 250 meters, then you also understand that 100,000 tons worth of gulf-balls need the thrust force created by at least 8,000 tons of dynamite to fly 250 meters.
      8,000 tons of dynamite is an 8 kiloton nuclear bomb!

      To all the curious minds, who are dying to know if nukes were actually deployed on 9/11 but cannot make sense of my above working paper, may I suggest hiring a high-school level tutor for an hour ($20-$40) to explain it to them step-by-step, and interactively, in order to ensure that they fully understand the force principles and proofs which I presented in my minimum nuclear yield-estimations?

      A group of curious souls can also get together to each contribute $5 to a mini-class tutorial, which helps even a better understanding of the thrust-force principles (the only basis of my minimum-force measurements).

      I hope that helped.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login


TOP 50 READ ARTICLES THIS MONTH
From Veterans Today Network