Jeff Becker, running for Senate in West Virginia in the Constitution Party, raised questions about the “foreknowledge” of WTC Building 7′s collapse on September 11th during a live televised debate that was carried nationally on C-SPAN. Indeed, even Becker’s campaign website announces proudly at the very top of his homepage that he “calls for new Senate investigation of 9/11.”
During the October 18 debate for the special election to replace the deceased Sen. Robert Byrd, Jeff Becker responded to a question about the “continued build-up of troops in Afghanistan” by telling the audience that “We need to first take a look at what happened on 9/11. There were actually three buildings that collapsed on September 11th.”
Becker, who noted himself as an engineer, went on to give an extended explanation concerning the impossibility of WTC 7′s collapse, as well as the contradiction between the laws of physics and the government’s official account [links added to suppliment the references to fact in his statement; emphasis in bold also added]:
“Building 7 was two blocks away from the twin towers– and that’s important to consider because it was not rained on by any debris. It was just a 40-story building. And at 5 p.m. on 9/11, Jane Standley, reporter from the BBC was standing right in front, at Ground Zero, and reported that Building 7 had collapsed, when in fact you could see it over her shoulder. And then, 20 minutes later, it did collapse. This is foreknowledge, and it needs to be investigated.”
“Additionally, Larry Silverstein, the owner of World Trade Center 7 Complex, before 9/11 had taken out a multi-billion dollar insurance policy to protect his property against a terrorist attack. And then, in 2002, on a PBS station interview, he said that he gave the order to “pull-it.” Pull-it is a controlled demolition term. More evidence of foreknowledge. And these are facts, you can watch the interview, you can look at the BBC footage. How did the British know 20 minutes ahead of time that this was going to happen? This needs to be investigated, there is a preponderance of anomalies surrounding the events on 9/11. Over 1,000 degree’d-and-licensed Architects and Engineers have looked at the information, and there’s just too much information that doesn’t make sense with the official story. The only way for the official story to make sense is if the laws of physics had changed on that day. And I’m an engineer, and I can tell you that they did not.“
Jeff Becker was mocked by establishment blogs like FireDogLake and Little Green Footballs for these statements, however he was able to communicate a powerful call to attention regarding the Building 7 issue without interruption.
Becker has also been a noted critic of the Federal Reserve, publicly supporting a full audit “to hold this shadowy organization accountable.”
“As your next U.S. Senator, I will fight for passage of Senate Bill S604, the Federal Reserve Sunshine Act, which will require a full audit of the Fed for the first time in its history. I advocate a return to hard money and an end to banker bailouts. It is time to hold this shadowy organization accountable.”
Though he is undoubtedly considered a “long shot” (typically, he is not even mentioned in this CNN poll, and he had to fight for enough signatures to get on the ballot), in West Virginia– where the other Senator is Jay Rockefeller– a candidate for Senate who would speak openly about Constitutional issues, the Federal Reserve and what really happened on 9/11 is a welcome sign of real “change” indeed.
We need more candidates of all stripes to have the courage to speak out on these important issues.
