In 2011 two of among the most respected members of the scientific 9/11 truth community, David Chandler and Jonathon Cole, issued a joint statement relating to the damage incurred to the Pentagon on 9/11, 2001.[1] They eloquently made the case that officials hold all the cards on the Pentagon so that there can never really be a true understanding of what occurred there. They suggest that the Pentagon might be a honeypot. A honeypot is a trap that is used to attract initial interest only to be discredited at a later time. This in term discredits all those that were manipulated into expending time researching and drawing attention to this event. This raises the question, could WTC 7 be a honeypot trap?

Any reasonable person that sees Building 7 (WTC 7) fall thinks that it looks just like any other controlled demolition they have witnessed. Only the truly delusional, which coincidentally includes all mainstream “skeptics”, could ever believe the official story of how it fell down. As I’ve written before, the only “evidence” for the official story of how WTC 7 fell is a computer model that looks little like what it is supposed to be modelling and cannot be verified by independent researchers.[2] In my writing I also showed that the controlled demolition hypothesis for WTC 7 has extensive supporting evidence. All competent conscientious scientists then should favor the controlled demolition explanation for WTC 7 over the official story.

Consider this scenario. Because of this extremely strong case, the number of people realizing that there is something not right with the official story will eventually reach a head. There will be a lot of anger and protests. At a certain point US government authorities will be forced to admit that WTC 7 was indeed a controlled demolition. However, they may have at the ready an entirely believable narrative as to why Building 7 had to be demolished and why they had to lie that it came down from natural causes. If this cover story is convincing enough, the masses will fall for it just like they fell for the overall official 9/11 story. For example, authorities could easily make the case that the building was unstable and to prevent further loss of life it had to be demolished. Remember when Larry Silverstein said something just like this?[3] They had to lie because mentally unstable conspiracy theorists could convince many that the Twin Towers were also controlled demolitions. This would prevent them from pursuing the terrorists that actually caused the disaster. Many would then possibly see those 9/11 activists that expended so much time on WTC 7 to have foolishly squandered their time on a non-issue. After all the building was badly damaged. Also, no one died when WTC 7 fell presumably because emergency personal were actually expecting it to come down.[4]

The Twin Towers however could never have a convincing explanation as to why government forces had to demolish them with almost 3000 people still inside. Doing something like that would be absolutely cold-blooded. Only a cadre of conscienceless psychopaths could deliberately demolish buildings with so many innocent people inside. The controlled demolition of the Twin Towers then could never be a honeypot. Officials may however give up WTC 7 in order to continue hiding the controlled demolition of WTC 1 and WTC 2.

I hope I’m wrong and WTC 7 is not being used as a honeypot trap. At any rate it seems the scientific 9/11 community should be concentrating their efforts on the Twin Tower falls. These events were by far the most traumatic. This is where the vast majority of deaths occurred that day. This is the event that so thoroughly traumatized the US people and indeed people all around the world. Yes it’s much more difficult to get people to question this event but it is also impossible for the Twin Tower controlled demolition theory to ever be a honeypot that could be used to discredit and immobilize the truth movement.

Notes

1. David Chandler and Jon Cole, “Joint Statement on the Pentagon: David Chandler and Jon Cole”, 911blogger.com, January 7, 2011 http://911blogger.com/news/2011-01-01/joint-statement-pentagon-david-chandler-and-jon-cole
2. Michael Fullerton, “A Scientific Theory of the WTC 7 Collapse” Foreign Policy Journal, February 14, 2011 http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/02/14/a-scientific-theory-of-the-wtc-7-collapse/
3. Eli Rika, “FAQ # 10: Did WTC 7 Owner Larry Silverstein Admit to Ordering the Controlled Demolition of the Building?” http://www.ae911truth.org/news-section/41-articles/696-faq-10-did-wtc-7-owner-larry-silverstein-admit-to-ordering-the-controlled-demolition-of-the-building-.html
4. “Point WTC7-7: Foreknowledge of the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7” http://www.consensus911.org/point-wtc7-7/