During a CSPAN interview, New York Times’ Chief Washington Correspondent David Sanger was asked by a caller why the New York Times has refused to cover the obvious controlled demolition of World Trade Center Building 7. Sanger’s response was evasive, obfuscatory, and mendacious.
The CSPAN caller asked Sanger:
“Across the street from the New York Times building there’s a billboard asking where your paper’s coverage is of the over 2,000 architects and engineers who are demanding a new investigation of Building 7’s destruction on 9/11, and the overwhelming evidence that pre-planted explosives destroyed it. Since this has everything to do with our national security, can you explain what rational and scientific basis your paper has for failing to fairly and objectively cover this crucial issue?”
Sanger responded with this circuitous answer:
“Trust me, the people who work at the New York Times have as much of a critical interest in what happened on 9/11 as anybody else. Because not only are they reporters there, but they live and work within the city. And we’ve devoted a fairly considerable amount of repertorial time over the past number of years to the question of all the different theories – conspiracy theories, regular theories, non-conspiracy theories – about what happened on that day. And you’ve heard the huge variety of them. We have not yet found any convincing evidence to suggest that there was a plot …that there was a plot that the President knew about in advance, which was one of the issues that came up. I was with the President on 9/11 at the school in Florida. I can tell you that he looked pretty shocked by what had happened, and shell-shocked by what had happened. And we have not found any evidence so far. That doesn’t mean that there’s none there. But we have not found any evidence so far to suggest that the building collapses were caused by anything other than the two airplanes that flew into them.”
Sanger blatantly evaded the caller’s question about Building 7, blaming the explosive destruction of the Twin Towers (designed to withstand impact of a Boeing 707, possibly multiple), and the smooth free-fall drop of Building 7, on “the two airplanes that flew into them.”
No airplane flew into Building 7, and no smoother and more symmetrical near-free-fall implosion of a tall building has ever been recorded.
Despite ReThink911’s billboard directly across the street from the NYTimes Building, and despite receiving numerous letters, op-ed submissions, informational materials, and phone calls, the NY Times continues to ignore the evidence of Building 7’s controlled demolition.