So Silverstein "pulled" his buildings so he could go broke rebuilding them?

hey roger... which was more cost effective - losing 960 million in lost renevue or paying 800,000 for asbestos removal?
 
ULTIMA1 said:
It can also be used to mean other ways to bring down a buidling. So either send FOIA to a demo company and prove me wrong or STFU.
Click to expand...

Oh... and I'm still waiting for the pictures of the thirty thousand ninja-demo guys you need for your scenario to work.
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
Actually, you did.

You used a word which, in the controlled demolition industry, is only used to describe pulling a building down with cables.




Not when you refer to it as "pulling".




FineWine obviously mistakenly forgot to add that important but tiny three letter word. It's a simple, easy mistake to make. You can save yourself some face here be responding to what his obvious intent was.
Click to expand...



What's going on here? Ultima's problem is easy to understand, but you're sane and intelligent. Am I seeing things, or does the word NO appear very large and bold in my post #85?

NO DEMOLITION EXPERTS RECOGNIZE "PULL IT" AS REFERRING TO EXPLOSIVES.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Some more facts to support my post, please try to debate me or concede you cannot.

http://www.investigate911.com/asbestos.htm

http://panynj.pubcomm.com/...
Contract WTC-115.310 - The World Trade Center Removal and Disposal of Vinyl Asbestos Floor Tiles and Other Incidental Asbestos-Containing Building Materials Via Work Order Estimate Range: $1,000,000 annually Bids due Tuesday, October 17, 2000 [emphasis mine].

http://www.erisk.com/news/weekly/news_weekly2001-05-11_01.asp
May 5 - 11, 2001
"Chalk up one victory for insurers in the escalating asbestos-claims mOlOe: the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey has lost a 10-year-old court battle to get its insurers to pay more than $600 million for removing asbestos from its properties, including the World Trade Center and New York's airports. The judge ruled that asbestos abatement costs by themselves do not constitute 'physical loss or damage' under the Port Authority's all-risk policies. The agency is considering an appeal." [emphasis mine]


http://www.fumento.com/asbest.html
[interesting overview on asbestos problem]
Copyright 1989 by The American Spectator
"Coming soon to a school or office near you: a life-saving innovation that could kill you, designed to correct a problem that doesn't exist, by removing materials that aren't dangerous until somebody tries to remove them. And guess who's going to pay for it." ... "For example, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is expecting to pay about $1 billion for the abatement of just the World Trade Center and LaGuardia Airport. (New York City law requires abatement if renovation work is being done, as it is at these buildings.) ..."
Click to expand...

Just as I figured, the Port Authority was responsible for removing the asbestosis. So you bringing this up is a total non sequiter in reference to this thread's topic.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
It can also be used to mean other ways to bring down a buidling. So either send FOIA to a demo company and prove me wrong or STFU.
Click to expand...

Show an example of the fire dept "pulling" a 40+ story burning building before or after 9/11, or STFU.

:bs:
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Some more facts to support my post, please try to debate me or concede you cannot.

http://www.investigate911.com/asbestos.htm

http://panynj.pubcomm.com/...
Contract WTC-115.310 - The World Trade Center Removal and Disposal of Vinyl Asbestos Floor Tiles and Other Incidental Asbestos-Containing Building Materials Via Work Order Estimate Range: $1,000,000 annually Bids due Tuesday, October 17, 2000 [emphasis mine].

http://www.erisk.com/news/weekly/news_weekly2001-05-11_01.asp
May 5 - 11, 2001
"Chalk up one victory for insurers in the escalating asbestos-claims mOlOe: the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey has lost a 10-year-old court battle to get its insurers to pay more than $600 million for removing asbestos from its properties, including the World Trade Center and New York's airports. The judge ruled that asbestos abatement costs by themselves do not constitute 'physical loss or damage' under the Port Authority's all-risk policies. The agency is considering an appeal." [emphasis mine]


http://www.fumento.com/asbest.html
[interesting overview on asbestos problem]
Copyright 1989 by The American Spectator
"Coming soon to a school or office near you: a life-saving innovation that could kill you, designed to correct a problem that doesn't exist, by removing materials that aren't dangerous until somebody tries to remove them. And guess who's going to pay for it." ... "For example, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is expecting to pay about $1 billion for the abatement of just the World Trade Center and LaGuardia Airport. (New York City law requires abatement if renovation work is being done, as it is at these buildings.) ..."
Click to expand...


You can open your eyes now. Your wish wasn't granted. It's still here:

http://911myths.com/html/losing_money_at_the_wtc_.html
 
FineWine said:
Normally I would conclude that person making such a blatantly false statement is lying.
Click to expand...

So fun and easy to prove you wrong with facts. NOw if you are having probelkms reading it clearly states that he decidece to evacuate the firemen without consulting the owner.

(THAT MEANS BEFORE THE PHONE CALL)

http://911guide.googlepages.com/danielnigro
For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.
 
Last edited:
ULTIMA1 said:
It can also be used to mean other ways to bring down a buidling. So either send FOIA to a demo company and prove me wrong or STFU.
Click to expand...


There is a list of two dozen demolition companies on one of the many "pull it" threads that shows that nobody in the industry swallows the snake oil you frauds peddle. You have been proved wrong--again--and yet you will never STFU.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
It can also be used to mean other ways to bring down a buidling. So either send FOIA to a demo company and prove me wrong or STFU.
Click to expand...

Stop lying.

Oh, and how the hell would anybody send an FOIA to a demo company. You do understand that the FOIA only applies to information held by the federal government, correct?
 
FineWine said:
What's going on here? Ultima's problem is easy to understand, but you're sane and intelligent. Am I seeing things, or does the word NO appear very large and bold in my post #85?

NO DEMOLITION EXPERTS RECOGNIZE "PULL IT" AS REFERRING TO EXPLOSIVES.
Click to expand...

I was in error. I took his quote at face value, missing your original post just above it.

My bad.

The word "NO" is unmissable, in my opinion. It appears he deliberately ignored it.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
So fun and easy to prove you wrong with facts.

http://911guide.googlepages.com/danielnigro
For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.
Click to expand...

Nigro says that the building fell down on it's own. You are a big fat LIAR!
 
ULTIMA1 said:
So fun and easy to prove you wrong with facts.

http://911guide.googlepages.com/danielnigro
For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.
Click to expand...


Look, I realize how ill you are, but even you can try harder.

YES, Nigro gave his orders, and, yes, the building collapsed three hours later.

YOU DO NOT KNOW WHO CALLED SILVERSTEIN OR WHEN THE CALL WAS MADE. You will make a complete fool of yourself again for days, but you DO NOT have the information you pretend to have.
 
dtugg said:
Nigro says that the building fell down on it's own. You are a big fat LIAR!
Click to expand...

Gee funny how you missed the point that proves the firemen were out of the buidling before the phone call.

He did not say it fell down, look whos the liar now.
 
Too bad you cannot give one single example of a 40+ story burning building being "pulled" before or after 9/11.

Funny how that little fact can crater someones conspiracy theory.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Gee funny how you missed the point that proves the firemen were out of the buidling before the phone call.
Click to expand...

On their way out of the building, did any of these firefighters notice any of your 28,000 ninjas with demo-packs waiting to go in after they left?
 
FineWine said:
YOU DO NOT KNOW WHO CALLED SILVERSTEIN OR WHEN THE CALL WAS MADE.
Click to expand...

Please do research before posting so you do not look so completley stupid.

The firemen were out of the buidling before the phone call was made.

Chief Nigro became the fire commader and called Sivlerstein.

Please do research so you do not embarass yourself so much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom