Guangzhou high-rise survives eleven hours of raging inferno

GuangzhouHighRiseFire photo GuangzhouHighRiseFire_zpsf2c91640.png

Source: CRIENGLISH.COM

 

Here are a few clues as to why the Guangzhou high-rise burned for more than eleven hours, yet did not suffer the same fate as World Trade Center buildings 1, 2 and 7:

1) Larry Silverstein hadn't insured the building against terrorist attacks to the tune of $3,546,800,000 "per occurrence", six weeks prior to two occurrences of terrorist attacks.

2) No fireproofing (SFRM) will be found to have "melted into a glassy residue", no steel will be found to have "vaporized" in "searing temperatures", the building's lead structural engineer will not report seeing a "little river of steel, flowing" in the debris pile, and there will be no WDS analysis of previously molten metal confirming an abundance of iron and scarcity of aluminum.

3) No SFRM "upgrades" to the Guangzhou building were carried out in the preceding five years.

4) There were no Israeli "moving companies" involved such as Urban Moving Systems, whose employees were caught filming the burning WTC whilst high-fiving, hugging each other and smiling, and whose operation in New Jersey and New York in the late 1990s was consistent with a murderous scheme to switch Blaze-Shield II SFRM originating from Stanhope, NJ and destined for the WTC, with a lethal replacement containing embedded accelerants designed to demolish the building in the event of a carefully targeted plane crash.

5) There was no bizarre "coincidence" whereby a Boeing aircraft targeted the very center of the upgraded SFRM floors (i.e., 92 to 100 of WTC1).

6) There was no bizarre "coincidence" in which measurements revealed the impact zone floors 94 to 98 happened to be the exact same floors with upgraded SFRM that had different characteristics - a higher density and cohesion/adhesion - compared to the SFRM on other upgraded floors, and consistent with the targeted floors' SFRM being embedded with accelerants.

7) Larry Silverstein's close friend, the BSc-qualified architect and twice-serving Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu, did not "predict" the destruction of the Guangzhou building by terrorists in a book he wrote six years in advance of the fire, and will not declare the incident to have been "very good" for Israel and then say the incident is still "benefiting" Israel seven years later when he is seeking a second term as premier.

8) The Zim American-Israeli Shipping Company did not move out of the Guangzhou building one week in advance of the fire.

9) Israeli security officials did not inspect an underground garage owned by the Zim American-Israeli Shipping company and conclude that it was vulnerable to a truck bomb, ten years in advance of the Guangzhou fire.

10) There was no truck bomb attack on the Guangzhou building to serve as a pretext for fireproofing "upgrades" eight years in advance of the fire, with the conspirators including Zionist assets such as a Mossad mole and an FBI informant, and with the bombing going ahead after an FBI supervisor called off a plan to switch the explosives with a harmless powder.

11) Rabbi Dov Zakheim, former CEO of a company that produced "Flight Termination Systems" capable of electronically hijacking in-flight aircraft and steering them into targets such as tall buildings and the Pentagon, did not co-author a PNAC paper that called for a "new Pearl Harbor" one year prior to the Guangzhou fire, and was not appointed as Pentagon Comptroller months before the fire when the Pentagon's accounting section was targeted in a terrorist attack on the same day, being a year after news broke of how the Pentagon's accounts were in such "disarray" that $2.3 trillion out of $7 trillion bookkeeping corrections did not even have receipts.

12) In the months leading up to the Guangzhou fire, there were no Israeli "art students" living within a mile of people who would later be accused of being suicide hijackers responsible for the fire, with around half of the "hijackers" later turning up alive and well.

13) In the case of the Guangzhou fire, no Police Commissioner (i.e., Bernard Kerik) claimed a "hijacker's" passport had been found and denied that an Israeli van stopped near the George Washington Bridge contained any explosives following multiple reports that it had "tons" of explosives, had taken a trip to Israel to meet with an Israeli billionaire two weeks before the fire, had subsequently received a $250,000 "loan" from the very same billionaire, and had later been convicted and jailed for lying, conspiracy and fraud.

14) There was no connection between the Guangzhou building and Israel, a State notorious for staging false-flag terrorist attacks (such as the Lavon Affair) for political gain, and which benefited after 9/11 through the sacrifice of thousands of other nations' soldiers, the squandering of $trillions in wars against Israel's foes, the killing and maiming of countless innocent civilians, and the torture and imprisonment without trial of other innocents whose only 'crime' was to live in a nation whose leaders had refused to become puppets of the corrupt Zionist elite.

For further information and references, see:

Why 9/11 researchers know the official story is false

The "Dancing Israelis" FBI Report - Debunked

Stranger Than Fiction

The Synagogue of Satan

Ground Zero fires could have heated the steel by up to 4 F