Bob Nevritt answersing a question about 9/11

[Cidersomerset]

Bob was on 12/29/2012 Saturday - Transcension with Matthew Hurtado and Sarah Landucci. This weeks special guest was Bob Neverit.


http://www.americanfreedomradio.com/Transcension_12.html

Aprox 26 mins in a caller Bruce rings in and asks if they could tell him
anything about 9/11.

Bob was a deep insider and probably still has links, so although
asked many times during his own show Bob usually will not say
much.But on this interview he says a few interresting things told
to him by ion,some he has said before but not usually enough to
make a post.

Its starts with the money loaned to the US by the NESARA fund.
The money leant to the Fledgling US to buy the Lousiana purchase.
Fund The war of 1812 and other loans, from a consortium led by
St Germain & China. In 2000 a payment was due and President Clinton
refused to service it even though the US was in the black at the
time. A consortium known as the 418 group organised the
inside job specifically to destroy the bonds and documents
held by Morgan Stanley.Which is why the 'planes' flew into
their offices.Also other information held by federal groups in
Building 7. He did not mention the Pentagon but obviously
the part targeted was where all the investigators were for
other investgations.

Its worth a listen imo, and hes says a few more interresting things
it runs to the break( Aprox 12mins).Basically we know 9/11 was a inside job
and it would be interresting to see if this 418 group exists ?
and who they are ? Bob says its not the Rockafella or Rothchilds
but elites more powerfull than them !


Cheers Steve...

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

wasn't there also an FBI sting regarding money laundering occurring at WTC the month prior to the disaster?

ty for this! btw:


A 2004 USA Today article, "NORAD had drills of jets as weapons", describes pre-9/11 NORAD drills that suggest they were prepared for such an attack as happened on 9/11:

"In the two years before the September 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties. One of the imagined targets was the World Trade Center. In another exercise, jets performed a mock shootdown over the Atlantic Ocean of a jet supposedly laden with chemical poisons headed toward a target in the United States. In a third scenario, the target was the Pentagon — but that drill was not run after Defense officials said it was unrealistic."[9]

Hmm here is one:


The Times reported on September 18 that investigations were under way into the unusually large numbers of shares in insurance companies and airlines sold off before the attack, in the UK, Italy, Germany, Japan, Switzerland, France and the US.[12][13] News accounts in the weeks that followed reported a notable pattern of trading in the options of United and American Airlines[14] as well as Morgan Stanley and other market activity.[15] An article published in The Journal of Business in 2006 provides statistical evidence of unusual put option market activity days before 9/11:

Examination of the option trading leading up to September 11 reveals that there was an unusually high level of put buying. This finding is consistent with informed investors having traded options before the attacks.[16]

In a statement to the 9/11 Commission in 2003, Mindy Kleinberg, of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee, said:

Never before on the Chicago Exchange were such large amounts of United and American Airlines options traded. These investors netted a profit of at least $5 million after the September 11 attacks. Interestingly, the names of the investors remain undisclosed and the $5 million remains unclaimed in the Chicago Exchange account.[17]

Regarding these trades, the 9/11 Commission found no malfeasance:

A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95% of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10... much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, that recommended these trades.[18]

[Cidersomerset]

wasn't there also an FBI sting regarding money laundering occurring at WTC the month prior to the disaster?

ty for this! btw:



A 2004 USA Today article, "NORAD had drills of jets as weapons", describes pre-9/11 NORAD drills that suggest they were prepared for such an attack as happened on 9/11:

"In the two years before the September 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties. One of the imagined targets was the World Trade Center. In another exercise, jets performed a mock shootdown over the Atlantic Ocean of a jet supposedly laden with chemical poisons headed toward a target in the United States. In a third scenario, the target was the Pentagon — but that drill was not run after Defense officials said it was unrealistic."[9]
Hmm here is one:




The Times reported on September 18 that investigations were under way into the unusually large numbers of shares in insurance companies and airlines sold off before the attack, in the UK, Italy, Germany, Japan, Switzerland, France and the US.[12][13] News accounts in the weeks that followed reported a notable pattern of trading in the options of United and American Airlines[14] as well as Morgan Stanley and other market activity.[15] An article published in The Journal of Business in 2006 provides statistical evidence of unusual put option market activity days before 9/11:

Examination of the option trading leading up to September 11 reveals that there was an unusually high level of put buying. This finding is consistent with informed investors having traded options before the attacks.[16]

In a statement to the 9/11 Commission in 2003, Mindy Kleinberg, of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee, said:

Never before on the Chicago Exchange were such large amounts of United and American Airlines options traded. These investors netted a profit of at least $5 million after the September 11 attacks. Interestingly, the names of the investors remain undisclosed and the $5 million remains unclaimed in the Chicago Exchange account.[17]

Regarding these trades, the 9/11 Commission found no malfeasance:

A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95% of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10... much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, that recommended these trades.[18]


Yes all these things, and more the fact the Towers were sold to Silverstein six
months prior stinks of collusion & corruption at the top by these crooks.The
conspiricy must have involved alot of top people in power and in the corporate
world I would have thought.



http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wrh2.gif


Deal of the Year: World Trade Center, New York, NY

Weighing in at $3.2 billion, the acquisition of the 99-year leasehold of the World
Trade Center was the largest of the year. "Notwithstanding the emotional difficulty
of celebrating anything related to the World Trade Center is the fact that upon
completion of its acquisition by Larry Silverstein, it was clearly the deal of the year
for the industry, and now more than ever, a deal of [a] lifetime for Silverstein" said
Ken Zakin, managing director at Insignia/ESG. [iiRealEstate]


Silverstein Makes a Huge
Profit off of the 9/11 Attacks

Six months before the 9/11 attacks the World Trade Center was "privatized" by
being leased to a private sector developer. The lease was purchased by the
Silverstein Group for $3.2 billion. "This is a dream come true," Larry Silverstein
said. "We will be in control of a prized asset, and we will seek to develop its
potential, raising it to new heights."

But the World Trade Towers were not the real estate plum we are led to believe.

From an economic standpoint, the trade center -- subsidized since its inception --
has never functioned, nor was it intended to function, unprotected in the rough-and-
tumble real estate marketplace. [BusinessWeek]

How could Silverstein Group have been ignorant of this?

Also, the towers required some $200 million in renovations and improvements,
most of which related to removal and replacement of building materials declared to
be health hazards in the years since the towers were built.

It was well-known by the city of New York that the WTC was an asbestos
bombshell. For years, the Port Authority treated the building like an aging dinosaur,
attempting on several occasions to get permits to demolish the building for liability
reasons, but being turned down due the known asbestos problem. Further, it was
well-known the only reason the building was still standing until 9/11 was because it
was too costly to disassemble the twin towers floor by floor since the Port Authority
was prohibited legally from demolishing the buildings. [Arctic Beacon]

Other New York developers had been driven into bankruptcy by the costly
mandated renovations, and $200 million represented an entire year's worth of
revenues from the World Trade Towers.

The perfect collapse of the twin towers changed the picture.

Under a pending agreement, a developer and his investors will get back most of the
down payment that they made to lease the World Trade Center just six weeks
before a terrorist attack destroyed the twin towers. Developer Larry Silverstein and
investors Lloyd Goldman and Joseph Cayre are nearing a deal that would give them
about $98 million of their original investment of $124 million, The New York Times
reported Saturday. [MontereyHerald 11/22/2003]


Instead of renovation, Silverstein is rebuilding, funded by the insurance coverage
on the property which 'fortuitously' covered acts of terrorism. Even better,
Silverstein filed TWO insurance claims for the maximum amount of the policy,
based on the two, in Silverstein's view, separate attacks. The total potential payout
is $7.1 billion, more than enough to build a fabulous new complex and leave a hefty
profit for the Silverstein Group, including Larry Silverstein himself.

As reported in The Washington Post, the insurance company, Swiss Re, has gone to
court to argue that the 9/11 disaster was only one attack, not two and that
therefore the insurance payout should be limited to $3.55 billion, still enough to
rebuild the complex.

Update: WTC Leaseholder May Collect Up To $4.6B

A federal jury on Monday ruled that the assault on the Twin Towers of the World
Trade Center was in fact two occurrences for insurance purposes. The finding in
U.S. District Court in Manhattan means leaseholder Larry Silverstein may collect up
to $4.6 billion, according to reports. [Forbes.com 12/06/04]


The result of court ruling: Silverstein makes a huge profit off of the 9/11 attacks.


http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/silverstein.html


Z9b4D-aO3zY



When the plane or whatever was planned to bring down building seven
did not happen, the back up plan was to pull it so it was pre rigged
in case this scenario happened.



ltP2t9nq9fI


Of Course they own and used mainstream TV to cover their tracks live !!

The best way to hide anything is in plain site !!