Larry Silverstein explaining what he meant by 'pull it'

[plague311]

Would it make even more sense if Silverstein simply made it up for the camera?

Uhm, yes. It would make perfect sense. For several reasons:

A) He's recalling events from a decent period of time before the interview
B) There is no reason for him to want to destroy his building. (He made no money, no matter what idiotic theory you think proves otherwise)
C) He had absolutely no control over it at all

 

[Edx]

Would it make even more sense if Silverstein simply made it up for the camera?

It would make more sense than what I just said truthers believe he meant, yes.

Either way, it cant, in any possible way, ever mean that he ordered the FDNY to blow up his own building.

 

[KreeL]

It would make more sense than what I just said truthers believe he meant, yes.

Either way, it cant, in any possible way, ever mean that he ordered the FDNY to blow up his own building.

Of course it wouldn't. Unless, WTC7 was rigged with explosives, and there was a demolition option.

"You want a burned out shell?...or shall we just terminate the structure..."

 

[Edx]

Noone fighting fires in WTC7 - check

Fighting fire across the street - check

Relevance?

7 is diagnosed by a non-engineer at the scene as being poised to collapse - check

It has been said that they did have structural engineers there that said it was at risk of collapse as well. 10 years before 911 One Meridian Plaza was also said to be at risk of collapse by structural engineers at the time and they pulled all the firefighters away from that building too, luckily the reinforced concrete saved it. Firefighters are also experts in how a building reacts to fire. They know that when a building is observed burning out of control for over 7 hours unfought, when it is bulging, creaking, groaning and leaning and things are cracking and falling that it isn't a stable structure.

Memos sent to media that 7 is going to collapse - check

Relevance? The FDNY and dozens of firefighters on record saying they all knew it was going to collapse hours before, yes.

Silverstein is called to get his input on whether to 'pull it' - check (?)

No. He is told that WTC7 fire cant be fought, that its being left to burn, that its unsafe and unstable and that they are pulling the firefighting and rescue efforts away for everyone safety.

 

[ozeco41]

It would make more sense than what I just said truthers believe he meant, yes.

Either way, it cant, in any possible way, ever mean that he ordered the FDNY to blow up his own building.

The trolls only want to discuss what Larry said to avoid facing the reality that there was no demolition.

No truther has ever put forward a supportable reasoned claim for demolition. That barrier is too hard for them. So they keep discussions circling on "What Larry said"; "Was there thermite?"; "Why the microspheres" and other trivia irrelevant to the main claim of demolition.

Since there was no demolition who cares what Larry said? Or if there was thermite on site. Or what caused the microspheres. (Add more to suit individual taste for trolling topics...)

 

[Edx]

Of course it wouldn't. Unless, WTC7 was rigged with explosives, and there was a demolition option.

"You want a burned out shell?...or shall we just terminate the structure..."

UH UH... So lets change the following shall we to reflect your new theory...

You believe it makes much more sense to think that he casually admitted fraud and conspiracy with the FDNY to set off the pre placed charges, which included super secret nano thermite, to demolish a building in a way never used before or since, without anyone noticing, in a pre-recorded documentary.

Right?

Unless you think he was not talking to the FDNY as well, so he casually admitted to blowing up his own building but intentionally lied about who helped him, but then no one notices he did any of that apart from a few fringe conspiracy theorists.

Still waiting for your definitive answer btw.

Do you accept that there WAS reason to pull everyone away from WTC7 when it was considered a collapse risk?

 

[KreeL]

"The FDNY and dozens of firefighters on record saying they all knew it was going to collapse"

Certainly firemen who have never seen a skyscraper collapse due to fire would instantly recognize when one is positively going to collapse hours before it does. Why? Because it's on fire, of course!

Funny no firemen knew WTC1 was going to collapse in 1975. I wonder why? Of course, because it didn't collapse!

Yet somehow no firemen knew 6 was going to collapse (because it didn't).

On 9/11 firemen predicted 1, 2, and 7 were all going to collapse. Amazing! I want their crystal balls!

Edited to add: We need to take those dozen firemen and send them to skyscaper fires around the country for their input, because they are amaaaaaazing accurate in predicting collapses!

 

[GlennB]

Of course it wouldn't. Unless, WTC7 was rigged with explosives, and there was a demolition option.

My bolding.

Why?
When?
How?
What would be the 'alibi' for the CD collapse? Debris impact and fire?
What if the 'alibi' had never come to pass? No impact. No fire.

I don't expect you to answer - no Truther ever has.

 

[A W Smith]

Fire chief on the scene: "Hey looks like WTC7 is going to collapse! I better call Silverstein and ask him if we should start moving people back! I don't know what to do!"

Get real.

Noone fighting fires in WTC7 - check

Fighting fire across the street - check

7 is diagnosed by a non-engineer at the scene as being poised to collapse - check

Memos sent to media that 7 is going to collapse - check

Silverstein is called to get his input on whether to 'pull it' - check (?)

Of course it wouldn't. Unless, WTC7 was rigged with explosives, and there was a demolition option.

"You want a burned out shell?...or shall we just terminate the structure..."

Except that they didn't "ASK" him . "THEY made the decision" Not "We" not "I" , "They"

 

[Justin39640]

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.

WTF?
You were talking about the difference between pulling search and rescue efforts prior to collapse before noon instead of at 3.

And yeah, in your new context, I'm sure that at 6PM on September 11th, 2001 S&R teams and anyone else on the pile were looking for stuff cause at that point NO ONE was 100% sure that no other nasty surprises were waiting for them. It was a terrorist attack after all.

 

[KreeL]

"No. He is told that WTC7 fire cant be fought, that its being left to burn, that its unsafe and unstable and that they are pulling the firefighting and rescue efforts away for everyone safety. "

There you go. You have your speculation, and other people have theirs.

After watching the collapse many times, it looks more like a demolition. Not just to me, but to millions of people. So judging by the results, my speculation is more accurate than yours.

 

[Justin39640]

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.

It's well known that FDNY had a transit on the building and were tracking the progress of it leaning towards the south (IIRC).

 

[twinstead]

"The FDNY and dozens of firefighters on record saying they all knew it was going to collapse"

Certainly firemen who have never seen a skyscraper collapse due to fire would instantly recognize when one is positively going to collapse hours before it does. Why? Because it's on fire, of course!

Funny no firemen knew WTC1 was going to collapse in 1975. I wonder why? Of course, because it didn't collapse!

Yet somehow no firemen knew 6 was going to collapse (because it didn't).

On 9/11 firemen predicted 1, 2, and 7 were all going to collapse. Amazing! I want their crystal balls!

Edited to add: We need to take those dozen firemen and send them to skyscaper fires around the country for their input, because they are amaaaaaazing accurate in predicting collapses!

Holy crap

So now what are the implications? You obviously don't believe FDNY personnel are adept at judging the safety of tall buildings, for whatever inane reason, so what's the deal? Were they in on it? Were they told what to think? Did they simply never said it was going to collapse in the first place?

 

[Edx]

"The FDNY and dozens of firefighters on record saying they all knew it was going to collapse"

Certainly firemen who have never seen a skyscraper collapse due to fire would instantly recognize when one is positively going to collapse hours before it does. Why? Because it's on fire, of course!

I just told you in the very post you quotemined.

They know that when a building is observed burning out of control for over 7 hours unfought, bulging, creaking, groaning and leaning and things are cracking and falling that it isn't a stable structure.

And you also ignored what I said about One Meridian Plaza. Progressive collapse from fire has always been a worry in fire and structural engineering. One Meridian was much smaller than WTC7, its fires were fought and had a lot if concrete reinforcement yet it was also deemed a collapse risk anyway.

One Meridian Plaza, 10 years before 911 didnt collapse, however structural engineers at the time felt it was at risk of a "pancake" collapse so the fire department pulled all their firefighters out.
"Consultation with a structural engineer and structural damage observed by units operating in the building led to the belief that there was a possibility of a pancake structural collapse of the fire damaged floors."
- U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series: Highrise Office Building Fire One Meridian Plaza

Funny no firemen knew WTC1 was going to collapse in 1975. I wonder why? Of course, because it didn't collapse!

Not every fire means the building is at risk of collapse, you've already been schooled on how different the 1975 fire was.

Yet somehow no firemen knew 6 was going to collapse (because it didn't).

So the firefighters, are they lying, stupid or ignorant? How can they be so unbearably wrong for over a decade?

 

[Justin39640]

Fire chief on the scene: "Hey looks like WTC7 is going to collapse! I better call Silverstein and ask him if we should start moving people back! I don't know what to do!"

Get real.

If your (the owner's) house is on fire and they can't save it. I'm sure they would try to tell you too.

 

[Justin39640]

"The FDNY and dozens of firefighters on record saying they all knew it was going to collapse"

Certainly firemen who have never seen a skyscraper collapse due to fire would instantly recognize when one is positively going to collapse hours before it does. Why? Because it's on fire, of course!

Funny no firemen knew WTC1 was going to collapse in 1975. I wonder why? Of course, because it didn't collapse!

Yet somehow no firemen knew 6 was going to collapse (because it didn't).

On 9/11 firemen predicted 1, 2, and 7 were all going to collapse. Amazing! I want their crystal balls!

Edited to add: We need to take those dozen firemen and send them to skyscaper fires around the country for their input, because they are amaaaaaazing accurate in predicting collapses!

Anyone who doesn't see the flaws in this sort of "reasoning" may be hopeless.

 

[Edx]

"No. He is told that WTC7 fire cant be fought, that its being left to burn, that its unsafe and unstable and that they are pulling the firefighting and rescue efforts away for everyone safety. "

There you go. You have your speculation, and other people have theirs.

Yes, you believe it makes much more sense to think that he casually admitted fraud and conspiracy with the FDNY to set off the pre placed charges, which included super secret nano thermite, to demolish a building in a way never used before or since, without anyone noticing, in a pre-recorded documentary.



Still waiting for you not to ignore this question Kree!

Do you accept that there WAS reason to pull everyone away from WTC7 when it was considered a collapse risk?

 

[Miragememories]

A courtesy call. Why do you refuse to answer all the critical questions regarding any of this? Whats the point in asking questions if you're going to ignore all answers and any points anyone brings up for you to just ask some other random question or say the same thing several pages later?

There's plenty youve ignored but this issue in particular is particularly ridiculous, so answer the question. Why is it so hard for you?

Q: In a building collapse, are you not in danger so long as you are not directly inside it?

Q: Would you want to be anywhere near a 47 story building if you thought it was going to collapse?

Courtesy calls on 9/11.

3,000 deaths but we should call this building owner and advise him that we are going to let his empty building burn.

Yeah right.

MM

 

[ozeco41]

Anyone who doesn't see the flaws in this sort of "reasoning" may be hopeless.

It's ridiculous even by trolling standards. Any competent troll could get "bites" without being so extremely silly.

 

[Edx]

Courtesy calls on 9/11.

3,000 deaths but we should call this building owner and advise him that we are going to let his empty building burn.

Yeah right.

MM

Good thing I have this to cut and paste each time you try and argue that our position is unlikely.

You believe it makes much more sense to think that he casually admitted fraud and conspiracy with the FDNY to set off the pre placed charges, which included super secret nano thermite, to demolish a building in a way never used before or since, without anyone noticing, in a pre-recorded documentary.

I notice you didnt answer any of those questions either. I take it you do accept that there was reason to pull people away from a building if that building is considered at risk of collapse, because Kree, Red and ergo have all said that there was no reason to do so if there was no one inside it.