Larry Silverstein explaining what he meant by 'pull it'

[Brass]

I know, eh?

It would be like finding nothing suspicious in the phrase "I lit the match and then we watched the warehouse burn."

As twoofers we make this weird assumption that saying things in a certain sequence means that things happen in that sequence. We don't know, for example, that the match was to light a cigarette and the warehouse didn't burn until three hours later. This information is only relevant in a court of law. Not in casual conversation to a national audience.

Or, "I cheated on her and then she left me."

Well, maybe the cheating was at a game of checkers. And her leaving wasn't until three years later. And it had nothing to do with the checkers! But as twoofers we jump to this logical conclusion, based on the words provided, of all things. Kind of like how lawyers or criminal investigators do. We're kind of silly that way.

So that a yes or a no to my invitation?

 

[Edx]

I know, eh?

It would be like finding nothing suspicious in the phrase "I lit the match and then we watched the warehouse burn."

As twoofers we make this weird assumption that saying things in a certain sequence means that things happen in that sequence. We don't know, for example, that the match was to light a cigarette and the warehouse didn't burn until three hours later. This information is only relevant in a court of law. Not in casual conversation to a national audience.

Or, "I cheated on her and then she left me."

Well, maybe the cheating was at a game of checkers. And her leaving wasn't until three years later. And it had nothing to do with the checkers! But as twoofers we jump to this logical conclusion, based on the words provided, of all things. Kind of like how lawyers or criminal investigators do. We're kind of silly that way.

Uh... both your examples show you're wrong... you claimed that after Silverstein finished talking on the phone the building collapsed straight after. "I cheated on her and then she left me." doesn't mean as soon as the cheating happened she immediately left. It could even be years inbetween".

 

[Travis]

I think it's funny that debunkers overlook this part of the quote, as if in English, people string together clauses sequentially when they actually mean hours between the events.

Or maybe we're supposed to think that the decision to pull the firefighters led to the collapse, which makes about as much sense.

Only in your imagination is it ignored.

And they (indicating the firefighters) made that decision to pull (meaning to get everyone as far from the building in case it collapses) and then we watched the building collapse (the event they were acting to mitigate).

 

[KreeL]

Logically, if the firemen knew it was going to come down, why didn't they move the people back before lunch, or 2:00, or 3:00? Instead, we see them hustling the crowd back saying things like "keep your eye on that building, it's coming down" around 5:00 -just before collapse.

Pure speculation, but interesting to say the least.

 

[Justin39640]

Logically, if the firemen knew it was going to come down, why didn't they move the people back before lunch, or 2:00, or 3:00? Instead, we see them hustling the crowd back saying things like "keep your eye on that building, it's coming down" around 5:00 -just before collapse.

Pure speculation, but interesting to say the least.

Two words... Search and rescue.

 

[KreeL]

So in the context of search and rescue, would the searchers and rescuers necessarily be looking for traces of thermite on the steel? NIST admitted they didn't look for thermite, so I would logically assume a search and rescue team wouldn't do NIST's job for them, and quite frankly they wouldn't have the time to bother thinking about it while looking for their fallen comrades. The rapidity of steel removal was the goal, and they certainly accomplished it. So quite frankly, no, they didn't sort out any of the steel they could remove, when they could take their time later picking out the pieces they wished to keep.

 

[TJM]

Logically, if the firemen knew it was going to come down, why didn't they move the people back before lunch, or 2:00, or 3:00? Instead, we see them hustling the crowd back saying things like "keep your eye on that building, it's coming down" around 5:00 -just before collapse.

Pure speculation, but interesting to say the least.

The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was [that] the collapse [Of the WTC towers] had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, 7
World Trade Center collapsed completely.

There you go.

 

[LSSBB]

So in the context of search and rescue, would the searchers and rescuers necessarily be looking for traces of thermite on the steel? NIST admitted they didn't look for thermite, so I would logically assume a search and rescue team wouldn't do NIST's job for them, and quite frankly they wouldn't have the time to bother thinking about it while looking for their fallen comrades. The rapidity of steel removal was the goal, and they certainly accomplished it. So quite frankly, no, they didn't sort out any of the steel they could remove, when they could take their time later picking out the pieces they wished to keep.

What are you impying? Who was this They? Do you have any sworn testimonies, paystubs, whistleblowers, money trail? How big an org are you talking about?

 

[KreeL]

Thanks, and with all the firemen and equipment being pulled back, I can see how it could take an hour or so to accomplish that task. Still interesting that the firemen seemed to know it would imminently be coming down. It could be a coincidence, as I believe many of the firemen were likely surprised when 7 imploded.

 

[KreeL]

What are you impying? Who was this They? Do you have any sworn testimonies, paystubs, whistleblowers, money trail? How big an org are you talking about?

My post is referring to NIST, who indeed did examine some of the steel, but not for thermite of course.

 

[ProBonoShill]

Logically, if the firemen knew it was going to come down, why didn't they move the people back before lunch, or 2:00, or 3:00? Instead, we see them hustling the crowd back saying things like "keep your eye on that building, it's coming down" around 5:00 -just before collapse.

Pure speculation, but interesting to say the least.

Hold on.

I thought NYFD was in on it, why would they be warning people and keeping them back, wouldn't they want to kill as many people as possible?

 

[ProBonoShill]

My post is referring to NIST, who indeed did examine some of the steel, but not for thermite of course.

They didn't examine it for 24k gold either, but I'm sure if some were present they would've mentioned it.

 

[beachnut]

My post is referring to NIST, who indeed did examine some of the steel, but not for thermite of course.

They checked for damage to steel, no thermite damage was found, no explosives damage was found.
The truth is,

NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.

When they examined steel, they found no thermite damage. Testing for termite is stupid, no thermite was damage was found. Thermite damage would standout. Iron fused to steel, etc. No melted steel.

How much heat did the WTC fires generate? Why can't you give me an answer? You did calculate this, look it up right? I mean you must of made some quick calculations, right? You spread lies and never used facts; why? Can you give an answer? How many joules? How much heat express in equal amount of heat by thermite? You did the math before you spread your lies, right? You offer nothing to support your crazy claims.

Knowing the heat energy from jet fuel was deemed insignificant by NIST, the heat energy equal to 315 tons of Thermite (the heat energy in the jet fuel), was insignificant compared to the office fires. This means the fires in the WTC packed the heat nearly ten times that of the jet fuel; kind of why the jet fuel contribution was deemed insignificant.

Bringing termite to an office fire bigger than the heat energy from 2,500 tons of Thermite, super stupid. No need for thermite to bring down the towers, or WTC 7. Fire did it. Fires not fought. Don't try this at home. 19 terrorists murdered fellow humans on 911, and you spread lies without thinking past what you google up from 911 truth's pile of lies and delusions. Why are you failing to understand 911? Because you trust the lies of 911 truth.

No wonder 'pull it' is the smoking gun for an inside job, for you and 911 truth. You guys have thought processes plagued by a faulty connect the dots algorithm based on a failed logic engine. 911 truth, 10 years down the road to eternal failure. Use some freewill to think for yourself, use freewill to breakaway from the lies of 911 truth.

As a note, please start a thread with your take on Flt 93, and Flt 77. I am interested in failed logic and poor research used to make up fantasy. What is your fantasy for 77 and 93. thank you, "pull it", your support for 911 truth lies.

 

[GlennB]

Not to mention that a collapse from debris and fire would look much different from a collapse from plane impact and fire, and Flight 93 hit shortly after 7 was hit by debris. Unless these super awesome kewl explosives could be remotely reconfigured to aim debris at 7 somehow when the bad guys realized they were about to lose Flight 93, which is even more impossible.

And hitting the initiation zone in the lower levels (where the explosives were apparently set ) with an airliner in Manhattan would have been a neat trick to pull off. A hang-glider might manage it though.

It really is such a ludicrous concept (but then they all are really so maybe it makes no difference?).

 

[Sunstealer]

My post is referring to NIST, who indeed did examine some of the steel, but not for thermite of course.

What is the standardised test for the presence of thermite? Could you please link to a national or international standard such as BS, DIN, ANSI, ASTM showing the procedure for "analysing for the presence of thermite".

Thanks

 

[000063]

So in the context of search and rescue, would the searchers and rescuers necessarily be looking for traces of thermite on the steel?

NIST admitted they didn't look for thermite,

Because there was no evidence. I don't look for evidence of an elephant in my shower when I go into the bathroom. Does that mean that an elephant can fit into my shower?

so I would logically assume a search and rescue team wouldn't do NIST's job for them, and quite frankly they wouldn't have the time to bother thinking about it while looking for their fallen comrades. The rapidity of steel removal was the goal, and they certainly accomplished it. So quite frankly, no, they didn't sort out any of the steel they could remove, when they could take their time later picking out the pieces they wished to keep.

Interesting attempt to derail. You have avoided the question of how and when these pieces were picked out, as well as the answer to your question about why they didn't move back earlier.

Ergo claimed that the steel was not sorted before being shipped away. This requires Them to have some way of determining which of the tons of steel was evidence at the landfill, and removing it. Not to mention the fact that the steelworkers removing the debris know what cut steel looks like. Anything from them about how they found some unusual pieces of steel? No? Weird.

Spin, spin, spin for you.

 

[Oystein]

Thanks, and with all the firemen and equipment being pulled back, I can see how it could take an hour or so to accomplish that task.

If the task was to rig WTC7 for demolition from scratch, please inform us what you see, in all due detail!

Still interesting that the firemen seemed to know it would imminently be coming down.

This is incorrect. You have been shown what the fire chiefs, particularly Daniel Nigro said: That they had been anticipating collapse for hours and had taken the necessary precautions hours before collapse actually occurred. This is far removed from "immenent" and renders your claim to be objectively FALSE. Please correct your error expressively in your reply!

It could be a coincidence, as I believe many of the firemen were likely surprised when 7 imploded.

What do you base that belief on? Are you saying that no collapse zone had been established around WTC7 by the FDNY chiefs, or are you saying that firemen on the ground were not informed about the establishment of a collapse zone around WTC7, or are you saying that firement don't understand that the establishment of a collapse zone around a building implies that their chiefs expect or fear a collapse, or are you saying that firemen on the ground disagreed with the assessment and decision of their chiefs? Whatever you are saying, I would like for you to give reasons (citations...) for your belief!
Alternatively, you could admit that your belief is based on no evidence at all.

 

[Craig4]

My post is referring to NIST, who indeed did examine some of the steel, but not for thermite of course.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CsZ5aJbVsA

If only the remaining steel weren't the only debris that could be tested for thermite or explosives.

 

[GlennB]

Thanks, and with all the firemen and equipment being pulled back, I can see how it could take an hour or so to accomplish that task. Still interesting that the firemen seemed to know it would imminently be coming down. It could be a coincidence, as I believe many of the firemen were likely surprised when 7 imploded.

Here's one set of cutter charges installed on a column.

Later they'll be connected to a very long run of detcord, which will be one of many connected to the CD command point (a long way away)

Prior to this the web of the column was torched in two places to allow the innermost charges to pass through.

Prior to that all the fittings and cladding and fireproofing had to be removed.

If you seriously think such a task - over scores of columns - could be achieved in about an hour - even under the most favourable conditions - then you are either deluded or trolling.

 

[triforcharity]

Thanks, and with all the firemen and equipment being pulled back, I can see how it could take an hour or so to accomplish that task. Still interesting that the firemen seemed to know it would imminently be coming down. It could be a coincidence, as I believe many of the firemen were likely surprised when 7 imploded.

Argument from personal incredulity noted, and dismissed.

7WTC showed signs of collapse early on in the day. Those signs were noted in the different sworn statements given by a few different firefighters, including Chief Nigro.

So no, your "belief" that the FDNY was surprised, is absolutely inaccurate.