Former "Swiss Re" manager: 9/11 was an insurance fraud (Interview with Eric Alan Westacott)

15.12.2021 | www.kla.tv/20992

Interviewer: I am pleased to welcome Eric Alan Westacott to Kla.TV today. Eric grew up in Switzerland as the son of an Englishman and a Swiss woman, started an apprenticeship as a detail fitter (steamship mechanic for the Lake Lucerne Navigation Company). However, he then went to England (after dropping out of the apprenticeship) and worked as a dishwasher in North London's Edgware Hospital. He returned to Switzerland at the age of 21, voluntarily attended recruit school and then went back to England. He entered the insurance industry and worked for the world's second largest reinsurance company, Swiss Re, from 1993 to 2001. Reinsurance insures an insurance company against major loss events. Swiss Re was the main insurer of the World Trade Center in New York, which was destroyed in 2001. And this is the topic of today's interview. Welcome, Mr Westacott. As an employee at Swiss Re, you signed a so-called confidentiality clause. Despite this clause, you are now going public for the first time and talking about your time at Swiss Re. What motivated you to take this step? Westacott: Thank you, that's a good question. That takes a lot of courage to be able to take that step. That was almost 20 years ago, 10 years I was really in the wilderness. I made like an escape from this system. I got out, I couldn't look at it any more. I left everything I had: wife, family, good income. And I thought, yes, I can talk about it sometime. And it's been 20 years now until I can talk about it. And it's like from the conscience, I have to do this even though there are laws and I'm a person who would like to follow the legal system. But like other people who go against what they know because conscience says it's no longer possible. People have been murdered, died. And something has happened where I might have knowledge that could contribute to the clarification, to get to the truth. Interviewer: What was your function at Swiss Re? And what made you leave your job? Westacott: Yes, so first I was recruited from London. I was working as a consultant back in 1994, I was working as a financial consultant for an insurance company. I was advising clients on what products they could/should buy or invest in to protect their future, in the pension area, health area, investment area. I had a full licence, I was a Fully Licenced Financial Planning Consultant (FPC) in England. That takes three years of study to train. And the company, the reinsurance company, was looking for a new person. They already had a person who was doing that, passing on to their clients the knowledge of how the market works, how to do sales, good sales, with ethically good structures behind it, that of course they have good business for themselves, the reinsurance business. Because the whole world sees England as a model, that is the first market, insurance market, Lloyd's (today Lloyd's of London) was the first concept of insurance, from seafaring. And the principle originated there, and that's why it's used as a guiding light (main player), worldwide. Yes, and for me it was very good and I was able to travel a lot internationally - South East Asia, Middle East, India, Eastern Europe - a lot of places I visited and that went on nicely for x years. And that's when my function changed a bit. I decided it would be better if I worked from Switzerland. I then made a transfer from London to Zurich, where all the account managers are, who more or less give me the order of which clients to visit. And then I went to Zurich and looked after these markets from there for several years. And suddenly we had a change at the top, and I got a new boss, two new bosses in the department. And one day, shortly after they started - they were Dutch - they decided that I was no longer responsible for this marketing and training, that I should function as an account manager. And I found that very strange, because I don't have any technical knowledge in the reinsurance business, so I said: "You've got the wrong guy! They said, "It doesn't matter, you will take over this market now." And I knew that we had already "downsized", we had made a lot of people redundant. And I knew I'd just go along with it a bit and I'd leave anyway. I knew then that I would leave the company and then I would do a bit of account management. And then I went into this market. I was then responsible for Turkey as an account manager. That was my last function. But it said both on the card. I had new business cards printed and it said account manager and marketing and sales consultant, which was quite strange for me. What was I doing in this market? I was made responsible for Turkey and I was sent there and I did a "due diligence". You ask the clients how things are going and give a "positive outlook" for the future; ask "what are their issues? And after a week I had enough information from them and I made my report. I reported that it was a good market, with a good future. And one of them gave me a lot of good information. I made a document like this, 200 pages with "Executive Summary" - good market, stay there, keep investing! Interviewer: It's worth going in there further, so to speak. Westacott: Yes, exactly. - Yes, that's when I handed this report to my new boss. He came back to me after a very short time and said, "Yes, thank you very much, but I want you to go back to Turkey and cancel all our contracts!" Interviewer: That doesn't really make any sense. Westacott: Nah, I've got black and white, all confirmed in 200 pages, why it's good to stay there. "No, you go back, please, as soon as possible!" "Yeah, why?" "It doesn't matter. It's a decision we're making. Please, go tell the customers!" Fine, I booked another flight there. And hey, they were angry! They were pounding the table and they were horrified. You don't cancel a contract with reinsurers every now and then, these are lifelong contracts, some of them have been in place for 40, 50 years. And I said, "Yes, I'm not firing the ambassador, I'm just the messenger. I myself am leaving this ship, I don't feel good about being with them anymore, I have resigned. I will also leave at the end of the year." Interviewer: When and how did you relate your experiences at Swiss Re to 9/11? Westacott: Yeah so a week before 9/11, I should probably start there. Because on 5/6 September, there was a two-and-a-half, three-day seminar. I invited clients, mainly from Eastern Europe, business clients of ours and all the top insurance executives. There were about 25 of them. And then I hired eleven speakers. The first time I didn't speak at such an event, otherwise I'm a speaker. And that's when I decided I wasn't going to say anything anymore. And one of them said - this was very clear and triggered a lot in me - the one speaker told the group: If another big event, incident, happened in the insurance industry this year, he wouldn't know where the money would come from to be able to cover this damage. Interviewer: Oh yes, interesting! Westacott: And, we assume a century event, for example, a major disaster - tsunami, earthquake. And in that period, there were events like that happening almost monthly and the industry was spending quite a lot of money. Interviewer: Yes, I understand that. Westacott: Yes, and I was at home on Tuesday morning after the event, after that seminar, and I did a bit of recovery. I had already set up home office by then. A call came in and it was my sister-in-law from New York. She said, "Eric, did you see what happened?" And when I turned on the TV, I saw the image of that second missile hit the second tower. And I thought, "Oops, this man was just talking last week that if one more event happened..." And there I am watching live, as the event happens before my eyes... And then when the two crashed together, that was quite clear to me. Of course, we had insured these buildings. We were one of the main insurers/risk takers of these buildings. But I didn't know all that at the time. I knew, "We probably had." But, never mind - the whole industry will be affected! And this seminar last week was obvious there. The message was clear: "If another big event happened this year, where would we get the money from?" And funnily enough - I actually only found out recently how bad it was - Swiss Re, they had to go to Warren Buffett (major US investor, entrepreneur, philanthropist and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway) to borrow funds so they wouldn't go under. And I have that officially now - so they paid that back last month, in April. Interviewer: Why did Swiss Re take on the reinsurance for the Twin Towers if it was supposed to have had prior knowledge of their destruction? Westacott: Yes, I have been looking for answers for many years. Why could that be? And just, conversations with certain people I met, and I tried to position the whole thing a bit. For me, that was always the catch. It doesn't make any sense. But now, when I look at the fact that they had to pay out the amount, actually only half of the insurance amount - maybe the governments or the people behind it in this conspiracy - Swiss Re might have thought: "Aha, maybe we'll get off lightly there!" I have to say, from my research: "In 2004, I think it was decided by a court in New York that it was limited to half of that amount". Because they had a clause built in: "If it was an event, like an earthquake, and those two towers collapsed, they would only pay half." And actually thanks to George W. Bush, because he knew very shortly after the collapse of these towers that they were terrorists and he then also carried out the war on terror. The court then decided on this classification: "Aha, this is an event, this is a terrorist attack! That's not three, four, five events separately, it's one event, that goes under terrorist attack." And that's why Swiss Re got off lightly and had to pay out the 877 million dollars on this clause. And then there was the purchase of American Re. So you can imagine that one of the biggest companies in America, the risk carrier American Re, is bought by Swiss Re, lock, stock and barrel. So you take all the losses, all the risks, all the personnel, all the buildings, which have been active in America for decades, for a very long time, also worldwide, you take that. And, whether there were any agreements? "Hey yeah, we'll sell you that already, but you might have to accept something that might not be so kosher..." I could imagine because when I came back from Turkey, after I had cancelled everything, I met an old director who was in charge of the Middle East and he was standing by the lift like in shock. I said, "Hey what's going on, are you okay?" I said, "Hey what's up, are you okay?" He got tired and said, "I just came back from Lebanon, Jordan and the Middle East, from these and these clients, you know them." I was there with him, I supervised them, I gave trainings there, market seminars. And he came back and just had to cancel everything and they are all Arab countries. And then for me, yes, it's like, aha, that's interesting. So was there any prior knowledge? Yes, I think so. This was also confirmed by the CIA whistleblower - it's difficult to say - Susan Lindauer. She said on 2 August 2001 that the CIA already knew on that day that something was going to happen to the Twin Towers. She made that public knowledge, it's recorded in the will. Yes, and a lot of sales were made, a lot of shares were traded. Z. For example, this "put option" on the value of aeroplane companies, on the value of insurance companies, before 9/11 and after 9/11. With "put option" you can make money by letting the prices fall. And there says the head of the secret service in Germany, this Andreas von Bülow, said that the fraud could have been 15 billion US dollars. What money they have made, already only on "put options". And the person who was responsible for put options at Deutsche Bank at that time was Mr Krongard. He was subsequently hired by Bush as CIA director. And there I just see very strange connections and for me it is very clear: "Something is not going well. Something happened where we don't have the whole picture and a lot of people died." And I think there is a right that the families, the relatives, get the truth about what actually happened and who is behind it. Interviewer: You assume that 9/11 was an insurance fraud. Can you explain this in more detail? Westacott: The new leaseholder, the Silverstein, had bought these buildings weeks before 9/11, so he bought the lease, signed the contract and you heard him say, "Pull, pull the building!" He said this phrase, it's caught on video, and in the explosives business, in the ammunition business of buildings, it's called "pull the building". It's like, it's time to take this down. Why did he say that? Who did he say that to? Why was it never followed up on? Why has he never had to testify in a court of law about what those words mean? And the whole thing of course with the process - why are insurers pulling out of a market or different markets that are under attack or likely to be involved in a war; war on terror. Nobody wants to cover any damage. That could cost a lot of money in such conflict zones. We see how a company has taken itself out of the risk in the Arab countries - before 9/11! For me, this is an interpretation that something is certainly not going well, that there is probably prior knowledge, as this woman confirms. The CIA already knew about it. They said very clearly on August 2: "The Twin Towers will be attacked." That's so. The BBC, there was still the story of the 3rd tower, that was at 5:20 in the evening, on 9/11. The reporter was in front of the camera and said: "Ah, we just got the information that the Salomon Building has also come down". And behind her the building was still standing when she made this announcement. So somebody knew that this tower - Mayor Giuliani, the mayor of New York, was in there. And actually he should have been in there. That was his "headquarters" in an emergency, in a situation like that. Well, you can say that it's so close to this building, so maybe that wouldn't be a good, safe place for him to go, sure. But the whole structure, WTC 7 is the name of this tower, that was from the CIA, NSA, Salomon Building, that was a very important tower - 43 floors, that would be the highest tower in Switzerland, for example - just collapsed in on itself. NIST says it was from a fire in the office. There were kind of sparks from the twin towers that shot over. You can see there are a few flames in the buildings. But for a whole building to collapse like that, I think there's something else behind it. Also with the towers, that they dissolve into powder and steel turns into powder and they collapse. And then: someone demands billions of insurance money. I have to say, "Could there be fraud?" To me, there is something wrong. It should be investigated further. Interviewer: Are there any other indications that this could be an insurance fraud? Westacott: Yes, I only came to it when I was already far, far away from Switzerland. I fled Switzerland after these events. Then I met someone who specialises in asbestos disposal and he knew ... When we had an exchange at the fire, he said: "These towers, these World Trade towers were full of asbestos - they had installed it as fire protection. If there was a fire, the structure would be able to withstand it better. And it was sprayed on like that, with a spray machine like that, the whole thing, sprayed on in such thick layers. It's very dangerous, of course, if this substance is loosening and after 20 years it might dust out - or with movements and so on. It would cost a lot of money to renovate the whole thing. It would all have to be sealed airtight, like two condoms over the Towers, and then all taken away and removed - safe removal. That's how they do it." The man I met, he has a company that does it. He said, "The cost of that, it's unaffordable." That's a good reason too. Then ah, oops, the towers are gone, the asbestos problem is solved, now we can rebuild them - I can see that. If I were an insurance investigator who had to look into cases like that, it's obvious that you would have to consider things like that. That's a big reason that the new leaseholder, the owner of these towers, doesn't want to bear these costs, or the owner of these buildings doesn't want to have these costs. That's why I would say the best thing would be for them to be blown up. Makes sense, doesn't it? Interviewer: Yes. How do you think 9/11 should be dealt with? What would be your wish? Eric Westacott: My wish would be for the relatives of the deceased to be able to understand what actually happened, what was behind it, and for the culprits to be held accountable. I don't see that happening under the structures that run this society in America. Yes, simply that people can then come to a conclusion and know, aha, that happened in such and such a way, out of these backgrounds, and that after 20 years they can simply come to rest. But in America that doesn't happen, they have a state secrets privilege. The act is called the "State Secrets Privilege" and every case that could somehow dangerously get to the truth, the American government can then say to the court: "Okay, you can let the case go, but we determine what happens". So certainly sometimes it happens behind closed doors and all the information is not made public. Z. For example, there is the case of Sibel Edmonds, who was recruited by the FBI to listen in on what conversations were going on in this room around the time of 9/11 and afterwards. And she discovered a lot of things, that very big names in America were involved. And she discovered that certain people had already known that 9/11 was going to happen. And she took this case to the highest court in America, "Supreme Court of America" (meaning "Supreme Court of the United States"). And they took this "State Secrets Privilege" act and muzzled her. And that's blatant for me to see - so she brought cases to this Supreme Court twice, and twice they held this act against her and said: "Yes, this doesn't go out this door, this information!" And one of them was precisely because she claimed that there was already prior knowledge from the intelligence services, from the FBI, that this event was going to happen. Now it is clear that if they muzzle this, there cannot be any court case published around this issue. It is quite clear who is speaking the truth and who wants to hide the truth. And if they knew about these attacks, why did they let it happen? Who are the people behind them? Who earned everything from these funds? They all have to be held accountable! And yes, the "9/11 Event Perspectives", which I have arranged in Zurich in 2019, was also for the fact that I could actually bring my story to the public there. But then I asked a "legal" lawyer from America and he advised me against it. He said: "Eric, if you speak your case there - because you signed this confidentiality agreement, you have the contract - you are not allowed to say anything about your experiences in this reinsurance area. If you do this now at this event, and if there was a court case in America in a few years, they won't hear you because you've already broken the law. You've already broken your contract." You already have information, but it can only happen through a judge that you break confidentiality. He can say, "Tell me what you know and I'll decide whether it can go out or not." And then the government comes along and says whether it's allowed to go out or not. That's how it works there. And probably no different in Switzerland. And yes, that's when I said I totally withdrew from the event. I also took myself off the list of speakers. Daniele Ganser was also there. There were quite good people there who made statements from their perspective on 9/11. And I moved away from that list and then had found someone new who could say something about these "Towers". That was Jan (-André) Zaba, a high structural engineer. He built such buildings. He campaigned for such buildings all over the world, also did risk assessments for insurance companies and ... quite a lot of knowledge. He wrote to me and said, "So yes, I'm happy to do it. I'm talking about my knowledge of the Towers, because it's a nonsense that these structures can collapse and dissolve into dust." And then, after a while, he told me that he was now writing to Swiss Re directly, to Mr Kielholz, and asking him why he was actually paying out money from a Swiss company for insurance fraud. That is against the interests of the shareholders. It's not good that a Swiss company is behaving like this. And he made a lot of accusations, also against him personally. And I read that. I said, "Send it to me first, I'll be happy to read it through." And then I advised him, and I told him: "Take this and this away, because this could actually be considered - how do you say - in court as an insult or a violation of honour, or even as slander (because) he has made very clear accusations, without proof of course. And I say, "Take that out, it'll only get you into trouble!" And then he sent it. He came to the event, then spoke at the event, gave his lecture: How strong these buildings were, how indestructible they were built! They were built so that a plane could fly into them, explode and nothing would happen. They were built that way. And, unfortunately, a few weeks after the event, in September 2019, I read that he had been found dead. And then I got scared. And I was glad that I didn't ... speak there myself. Yes, that's when I got scared. But... I'll take it like this!? But I also accept it now, because my son will be three in November and - yes, it's my knowledge, I have to talk about it. I have to bring the truth to light and for me it is worth more than my life. Interviewer: What would your closing words be? Westacott: Yes, my closing word is: "peace". And yes, I mean by that: After this interview, I am like redeemed. I have fulfilled my mission. My conscience is clear. Over the years, I have also written to the police, the Federal Police, Interpol, the FBI, I have written to the CIA, I have written to federal councillors, I have written to presidents. Ah, even Trump said that when he saw the tower from his "Trump Building", he also saw that this tower was on fire and so ..., he then said in a live radio interview: "Those were bombs. An aeroplane can't get in there." And he builds these buildings himself, he has a business. And when he says things like that himself, I think there's a lot behind it that's allowed to come out. I have done my job. I thank you for letting me use this platform. And I want ... I want to go back to my family, have a wife and child and live a life like "normal" people. And find peace and continue my life in love. And by my knowledge - I'm also happy to God that I was allowed to make such a path. I lived free, I lived in the forest, I made and had to make a lot of knowledge. And I also want to pass on my knowledge, for children above all, for young people, to show them that there are alternative ways - and connected with nature, and can come to health. That is my closing word: "Peace". Thank you very much. Interviewer: Yes, thank you very much for the interview. Thank you for your openness and for sharing this im-portant information with us and with the public. Dear viewers, I think this is again a very important building block to understanding 9/11. Please also help this knowledge to be widely disseminated and distribute this program to as many people as possible. Thank you very much.

from dd.

Sources/Links: Susan Lindauer, ehemalige CIA-Agentin, über 9/11: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkFSS9kCEz8
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2thd13
9/11-WTC7 Larry Silverstein says 'PULL IT': www.youtube.com/watch?v=p34XrI2Fm6I
Twin-Towers-Einsturz zwei Schadensereignisse: https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/twin-towers-einsturz-zwei-schadensereignisse/576320
Prozess um die Zwillingstürme zwischen Swiss Re und dem Pächter des World Trade Center, Larry Silver-stein: https://www.news.uzh.ch/de/articles/2007/2732.html
Larry Silverstein über den Rechtsstreit mit dem Hauptversicherer Swiss Re: https://www.handelszeitung.ch/panorama/die-fakten-nicht-ganz-parat
Sibel Deniz Edmonds, ehemalige US-amerikanische Übersetzerin FBI, die in der Folge eine der bekanntes-ten Whistleblowerinnen in den USA wurde: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibel_Edmonds
https://www.fremd-vertraut.de/Downloads/Mathias_Broeckers.pdf
Programm zu „9/11 Perspektiven“ am 11. September 2019 im Volkshaus/ Zürich: https://www.safety-plus.ch/9-11-perspektiven/
Webseite von Eric Alan Westacott: http://forestevents.ch./