Mainstream media finally cover WTC Building 7
Rupert Murdoch's New York Post marked the 22nd anniversary of the 9/11 tragedy with the headline, “Inside the forgotten third World Trade building occupied by CIA that burned down on 9/11.”
Burning furniture
World Trade Center (WTC) 7 was a 47-story steel structure which collapsed, several hours after the Twin Towers (WTC 1 and 2) came down, without ever being hit by a plane or suffering a jet fuel fire, Rather, according to the government's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the steel beams caved in from the heat of burning desks and chairs: “The fires were fed by ordinary office combustibles.”
The government maintains, in an online Q & A, that these fires alone initiated the collapse:
The fires initiated by the debris [from the collapse of WTC 1], rather than the structural damage that resulted from the impacts, initiated the building's collapse after the fires grew and spread to the northeast region after several hours. The debris impact caused no damage to the spray-applied fire resistive material that was applied to the steel columns, girders, and beams except in the immediate vicinity of the severed columns. The debris impact damage did play a secondary role in the last stages of the collapse sequence . . . [Emphases added].
1. Ignore
Most news pieces on 9/11 omit any mention of the third building and not by accident, according to Tucker Carlson, who says journalists would be fired if they opened up questions about Building 7.
If you say like, “what actually happened with Building 7” . . . you'd lose your job . . .
Anything you're not allowed to ask questions about, is something you should be asking more questions about.
2. Discredit
In the rare news pieces in which Building 7 is mentioned, it's generally to discredit the idea that burning furniture would not cause steel beams to collapse. A Google search for “WTC Building 7,” for example, provides the following entries as the first four results:
- Wikipedia, 7 World Trade Center: “NIST found no evidence to support conspiracy theories such as the collapse being the result of explosives . . .”
- USA Today, Fact check: World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed due to fire on 9/11, not pre-rigged explosives.
- Full Fact, World Trade Center 7 didn’t collapse for ‘no apparent reason'
- NY Mag, Building 7, Collapse of: “In the truth-movement canon, ‘Building 7’ has assumed the Jack Ruby–Lee Harvey Oswald position in the overall 9/11 conspiracy claiming the entire episode was ‘an inside job,’ planned and carried out by individuals connected to the Bush agenda.”
3. Cover objectively
With the 22-year history of mainstream media ignoring or discrediting alternative theories about Building 7, one might expect an article focusing on the “the forgotten third World Trade building” to be another debunking effort, but surprisingly, the New York Post did nothing of the sort:
According to [NIST], the building succumbed to the intense heat of fires ignited by debris from the nearby North Tower collapse.
This explanation, however, failed to satisfy a group of engineers and architects who have sought the truth.
Enter the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911T), a coalition of over 3,000 professionals, including scientists, engineers, and architects, who have dedicated themselves to uncovering the facts.
In 2020, they filed a formal Request for Correction with NIST, backed by a comprehensive 4-year analysis conducted by a team at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF).
The UAF study challenges NIST’s conclusions, suggesting that the collapse of Building 7 was a “near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.” This contradicts NIST’s assertion that fire weakened the steel supports, causing them to fail and the building to collapse. [Emphasis added].
The New York Post even refers to a controlled demolition as a “plausible cause” of the collapse:
The UAF study identified fundamental errors in how engineers estimated the rigidity of the building’s outside frame and challenged the idea that the heat from the fires triggered critical structural movements. Moreover, AE911T, including families of the victims, insists that the investigation must be grounded in “science and engineering” and should not dismiss the possibility of controlled demolition as a plausible cause.
The debate intensifies as the UAF study contends that the outside frame was more flexible than the inside structure, making the NIST’s claim of a 6.25-inch displacement untenable. [Emphases added].
While debunking attempts conclude with a rejection of an alternative theory, the New York Post concludes that the cause of the collapse "remains unresolved."
As of today, the mystery surrounding the collapse of World Trade Center 7 remains unresolved, and questions continue to linger. . . .
And though much remains unanswered, one thing is certain: the legacy of Building 7’s collapse will remain an enigmatic and contentious chapter in the history of that tragic day. [Emphasis added].
The article even included a tweet mocking the establishment's attempts to keep Building 7 out of the news.
Mainstream?
The New York Post's coverage, especially in light of its initial reporting on Hunter Biden's laptop, might lead some to believe the outlet to be outside the realm of mainstream media. Murdoch, however, owns a lot more than just this paper. His assets include mainstream outlets like the Wall Street Journal, MarketWatch, Barron's, the Sun, Fox News and the neo-con Weekly Standard among others.
As for Murdoch's personal views, he recently called off an engagement because his fiancee was too conservative.
An exposé in The New American details some of Murdoch's leftist ideology.
• Embracing Communist China
Murdoch has continually kowtowed to the communist rulers in Beijing — censoring news, and favoring the regime over its victims, as in the cases of the persecuted Falun Gong, imprisoned Christians, and the ongoing genocidal occupation of Tibet.
• Giddy Over Obama
Some of Murdoch’s Obamamania gushing: "He is a rock star. It’s fantastic" "I love what he is saying about education." "I am anxious to meet him."
• Supporting Hillary and Other Far-left Democrats:
Murdoch hosted a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and the Murdoch-owned “conservative” New York Post endorsed her bid for the Senate over conservative Republican John Spencer, who was pro-life, pro-marriage, pro-economic growth, and pro-Second Amendment. Murdoch has also given campaign contributions to other far-left Democrats including Rep. Harold Ford.
• Global Greenie
It is Murdoch’s recent conversion to extreme environmentalism that may be the most pertinent indicator of the meaning of his remarks about the alteration and redefinition of nations. In 2006, The Weather Channel, which has gone bonkers over fears of global warming, praised Murdoch for his remarkable climate-change epiphany.
Murdoch's secret societies
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, when asked why Donald Trump was so hated by the establishment, responded that it's because he's not a member of their secret societies.
Because he's an outsider. He's not them. He's not part of the club. He's uncontrollable, you know. He hasn't been through the initiation rites. He didn't belong to the secret society. [Emphases added].
Murdoch, however, does belong, as detailed by The New American, which labels him, “the most powerful media baron on the planet.”
Murdoch’s Climate Change Crusade is not the only alarming indicator of his penchant for one-worldism. A frequent attendee World Economic Forum and at the far more exclusive and secretive Bilderberg gatherings, Murdoch is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the premier organization in the United States promoting world government.
In addition to himself, other CFR members on [Murdoch's] News Corp’s board of directors are John L. Thornton and Stanley S. Shuman.
Former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, a commited globalist, also serves on the board. Aznar also serves on the International Advisory Board of the Atlantic Council of the U.S. (ACUS), one of the principle adjuncts of the CFR pushing for merging of nation states into regional and global governance. [Emphases added].
Why?
Why then does Murdoch operate relatively conservative outlets? The New American goes on to describe his outlets as "herders to keep the GOP’s core constituency within the party."
Although he is usually described as (and demonized by the political left as) a political conservative, there is little evidence that he has any firm political or moral convictions that could be described as “conservative” in the conventional sense.
While Murdoch’s Fox News is famous (or infamous) for ranting commentators who toe the Republican line and serve as herders to keep the GOP’s core constituency (pro-life, pro-gun, pro-family, fiscally conservative, small government) within the party, his global tabloid-TV-movie-entertainment conglomerate is always on the cutting edge of breaking taboos: profanity, sexually explicit material, pornography, violence, crudity. [Emphases added].
In The New American's view, Fox News and the New York Post, like the Republican Party, are part of the “controlled opposition,” allowing conservative listeners to hear what they already know and believe, without converting new people to those viewpoints, while preventing conservatives from turning to alternative media and learning true constitutional principals and information about the dangers of government actions. That information, available in alternative media, could be used to turn the tide against creeping socialism in the US.
Thus, for example, Murdoch would rather have parents, who are upset with males in their daughters' public school bathrooms, watch a Fox News segment on a school board meeting rather than go to an alternative news site and read a constitutional analysis of the illegality of the Department of Education and join an effort to close government schools.
Stay out of the rabbit holes
When, however, belief in government claims are damaged to the point where millions of citizens are sending each other videos attacking the government line, controlled opposition outlets risk losing followers to alternative outlets. In that case, even if it means educating some middle-of-the-road individuals who are not yet convinced of a particular government coverup, mainstream media faces pressure to cover that issue. The alternative is to allow followers to start on a true research path that could take them down a rabbit hole in which they learn the true aims of the very societies in which Murdoch holds membership.
Please see our previous article on 9/11:
9/11: The day freedom was planned to die? Biden wrote Patriot Act draft in 1994
