Larry Silverstein explaining what he meant by 'pull it'

[KreeL]

Why do you continue to harass me, beachnut? We are simply discussing whether or not there was a CD at 7 referring to the 'pull it'. The discussion lead to the point that you didn't think there was any evidence of explosions, so I provided it. There are quite a few eyewitness accounts and vids of explosions. These aren't from 'kooks' but ordinary people, as well as firemen, policemen, and first responders.

 

[beachnut]

Why do you continue to harass me, beachnut? We are simply discussing whether or not there was a CD at 7 referring to the 'pull it'. The discussion lead to the point that you didn't think there was any evidence of explosions, so I provided it. There are quite a few eyewitness accounts and vids of explosions. These aren't from 'kooks' but ordinary people, as well as firemen, policemen, and first responders.

There are no videos of explosives. Zero. You are confused, and trolling.

Put me on ignore. Please.

You are a confessed troll, you brag about it. You are proud about it. You don't use evidence to decide what happen on 911, you use nonsense.

There was no CD at WTC 7, and if you or 911 truth uses "pull it" as proof, then you failed to understand language, and need help.

The videos you post are not proof of explosives. If you don't understand, then you are not able to use logic to make rational conclusions, which may be due to your "masterful trolling of JREF" goal.

 

[332nd]

Why do you continue to harass me, beachnut? We are simply discussing whether or not there was a CD at 7 referring to the 'pull it'. The discussion lead to the point that you didn't think there was any evidence of explosions, so I provided it. There are quite a few eyewitness accounts and vids of explosions. These aren't from 'kooks' but ordinary people, as well as firemen, policemen, and first responders.

What gave you the idea that beachnut didn't think there was evidence of explosions?

 

[KreeL]

There are no videos of explosives. Zero. You are confused, and trolling.

Put me on ignore. Please.

You are a confessed troll, you brag about it. You are proud about it. You don't use evidence to decide what happen on 911, you use nonsense.

There was no CD at WTC 7, and if you or 911 truth uses "pull it" as proof, then you failed to understand language, and need help.

The videos you post are not proof of explosives. If you don't understand, then you are not able to use logic to make rational conclusions, which may be due to your "masterful trolling of JREF" effort.

Now name calling is part of your resume. Can you be civil enough to engage in debate? If not, then I will ignore you.

Evidence of explosions would lead one to believe that explosives could have been used. There are other things that explode in fires such as power transformers, cans of hairspray, gas tanks in damaged cars, etc., yet explosives should also be, at the very least, considered in your theory simply based on Barry's eyewitness account alone. Do you think he was lying? He was inside 7, afterall.

 

[beachnut]

Now name calling is part of your resume. Can you be civil enough to engage in debate? If not, then I will ignore you.

Evidence of explosions would lead one to believe that explosives could have been used. There are other things that explode in fires such as power transformers, cans of hairspray, gas tanks in damaged cars, etc., yet explosives should also be, at the very least, considered in your theory simply based on Barry's eyewitness account alone. Do you think he was lying? He was inside 7, afterall.

You mean witness reports like these?

"Sounded like bombs" –Keith Murphy
"A huge explosion" –Gerard Gorman
"Sound of popping and exploding" –Alwish Monchery
"Explosions" –William Burns
"Kept hearing these large boom, boom" –Rosario Terranova
"Sounded like explosions." –Anthony Fitzgerald
"Like a shotgun going off" –Mark Meier
"Sounded like explosions" –Wilfred Barriere
"Sounded like bombs, like blockbusters" –John Murray
"You could hear explosions" –Richard Smiouskas
"Sounded like an M-80, that's how loud they were" –Tim Pearson
"Sounds like a shotgun" –Eric Ronningen
"Sounded like an explosion" –John Morabito
"There were lots of explosions" –Jeff Birnbaum
"Under the assumption that the sounds were secondary bombs." –Andrew Rodriguez
"Sounded like bombs. Like a bomb going off. I mean, it was huge." –FDNY Deputy Chief Peter Hayden

??

Name calling? You are proud, you brag about it.

KreeL - Thu Feb 09 05:33:15
I am working on a another masterful trolling spree in JREF's 9/11 threads.

Are you a "pull it", can't understand what was meant CD person?

You presented videos already seen, and debunked, they are not evidence of explosives, they are evidence of your gullibility. I saw live events on 911, you are posting failed junk. I have talked to witnesses, you post nonsense.

 

[332nd]

Now name calling is part of your resume. Can you be civil enough to engage in debate? If not, then I will ignore you.

Evidence of explosions would lead one to believe that explosives could have been used. There are other things that explode in fires such as power transformers, cans of hairspray, gas tanks in damaged cars, etc., yet explosives should also be, at the very least, considered in your theory simply based on Barry's eyewitness account alone. Do you think he was lying? He was inside 7, afterall.

No physical evidence of explosives was found, now what gave you the idea that beachnut thinks there is no evidence of explosions?

 

[KreeL]

What gave you the idea that beachnut didn't think there was evidence of explosions?

I am simply pointing out, that explosive evidence, such as the recently released NIST video of the collapse of 7, where you hear the boom, and then the penthouse disappears, and the account from Barry about his experience inside 7, that to simply rule out explosives because there isn't a picture of one is simply not smart. When you see cause and effect, you can reasonably theorize that explosives were indeed used.

 

[beachnut]

I am simply pointing out, that explosive evidence, such as the recently released NIST video of the collapse of 7, where you hear the boom, and then the penthouse disappears, and the account from Barry about his experience inside 7, that too simply rule out explosives because there isn't a picture of one is simply not smart. When you see cause and effect, you can reasonably theorize that explosives were indeed used.

Barry was not in WTC 7 when it collapsed.
Barry was in WTC 7 when it got hit by part of a WTC tower. Explosives on a floor below him would kill him. Part of WTC tower destroying the floor below him, would knock him over. An explosives which destroyed the floor and knocked him down would kill him on the spot. Fail logic, and gullibility are your problem as you fall for lies of CD.

There was no boom of explosives on 911. No boom before the 18 second plus collapse of WTC7, not close to free-fall.

Barry proves no explosives.

 

[332nd]

You posted...

The discussion lead to the point that you didn't think there was any evidence of explosions, so I provided it.

What lead you to believe beachnut didn't think there were explosions?

 

[KreeL]

Barry was not in WTC 7 when it collapsed.
Barry was in WTC 7 when it got hit by part of a WTC tower. Explosives on a floor below him would kill him. Part of WTC tower destroying the floor below him, would knock him over. An explosives which destroyed the floor and knocked him down would kill him on the spot. Fail logic, and gullibility are your problem as you fall for lies of CD.

Barry attests that this explosion was before the collapse of the twin towers.

 

[beachnut]

Barry attests that this explosion was before the collapse of the twin towers.

Barry lived through a blast? You debunk yourself on your masterful trolling of JREF.

You did no listen to Barry. The landing fell? If it was an explosive, he would be dead. Blown up, brain mush! Barry has no clue when the towers fell. They were praying under a desk! His video is how many years old?

Barry would be dead, never to talk. The WTC tower hit the floor, and knocked him down. An explosive would have killed him, dead. He had no blast damage to his ears, to his brain, to his body. He fell down, bang!

You sure are gullible. You present failed videos, and can't answer what "pull it" means. double failure, a no so masterful trolling of JREF.

 

[Craig4]

Indeed, 3000 that day, and over 100,000 since. I want you to understand what really happened, and the official conspiracy failed. To get to the bottom of this more avenues beg to be explored. I am not saying it was an inside job, or the jews, or anyone else. I'm saying your conspiracy can't be right without any additional evidence. When this happens at a crime scene, the detectives start over with new theories. That is what is needed from the true skeptics in this forum.

I'm here to help afterall.

Find the explosive residue yet?

 

[000063]

Let me clarify. They rescued Barry and Hess sometime shortly after lunch. No disputing that. However, if you view Barry's eyewitness account of how they were blown back up into the 8th floor, it's obvious something exploded below them in the lower floors. In my theory explosions are going off everywhere on a regular basis. Afterall, to drop these structures like they did, the lower infrastructures had to compromised.

No, that is false. Assuming they had explosives and wiring that could survive a plane impact and fire, they could just collapse the portion around the crash site for WTC 1 and 2 and let gravity do the rest. The upper portion or each hit the lower with about thirty times its own weight, more than the weight of both buildings combined. That only leaves WTC 7, which you are alleging had CD charges going off several hours before the collapse. Explosives which were not noticed by people inside the building.

And like all Truthers, you're ignoring the question of how They knew WTC 7 would be hit by debris, set on fire, and give them an excuse.

Edited to add: To address a previous question, there was someone who was cherrypicking the testimonies of the firemen. Ignoring completely the ones I dug up from memory.

Who, pray tell? Which post? And you admitted your memory's unreliable, several pages back.

 

[000063]

According to his statement - yes.

There are vids -with sound- that you can hear explosions going off in the WTC complex that day. Handwaving away explosions reported by numerous eyewitnesses, as well as the firemen and first responders, is simply erroneous on your part. Any theory you make up must incorporate the reality of the day.

There's a difference between handwaving and saying the explosions were not conclusive or even significant evidence of explosives. Numerous evidence has been presented, over the years, to show that explosions are actually quite common in fires. None of the explosions, however, were consistent with those found in CDs.

Now name calling is part of your resume. Can you be civil enough to engage in debate? If not, then I will ignore you.

Evidence of explosions would lead one to believe that explosives could have been used. There are other things that explode in fires such as power transformers, cans of hairspray, gas tanks in damaged cars, etc., yet explosives should also be, at the very least, considered in your theory simply based on Barry's eyewitness account alone. Do you think he was lying? He was inside 7, afterall.

With a complete lack of any corroborating physical or medical evidence which would be present in the case of explosives, such as barotrauma. Explosives, therefore, are right out.

 

[000063]

No physical evidence of explosives was found, now what gave you the idea that beachnut thinks there is no evidence of explosions?

What gave you the idea that beachnut thinks there is no evidence of explosions?

I am simply pointing out, that explosive evidence, such as the recently released NIST video of the collapse of 7, where you hear the boom, and then the penthouse disappears, and the account from Barry about his experience inside 7, that to simply rule out explosives because there isn't a picture of one is simply not smart. When you see cause and effect, you can reasonably theorize that explosives were indeed used.

Quote mining, strawmanning, and dodging questions too? What are you, ergo's apprentice? Do you plan to overthrow him someday and rise to the position of Sith Lord?

 

[Edx]

According to his statement - yes.

So you believe in explosives that don't work like explosives, then.

There are vids -with sound- that you can hear explosions going off in the WTC complex that day.

The only one you will find is the one with the firefighters next to the phone booth, and even if its not fake was still 7 hours before WTC7 collapsed.

There is several videos of varying distances from WTC7 and none show any sound consistent with explosives of any sort. Therefore you either have to believe in very quiet explosives, or you have to believe that explosives went off hours earlier and then later on the building collapsed. What kind of crazy demolition works like that?

And while we're at it, why did no firefighters say there were any explosions going on inside 7 that sounded suspicious? Again, you guys require the firefighters to be idiots and incompetent or lying.

Handwaving away explosions reported by numerous eyewitnesses, as well as the firemen and first responders, is simply erroneous on your part. Any theory you make up must incorporate the reality of the day.

Its not handwaving, we expect explosions and you can find people reporting explosions in hundreds of other fires and occasions that don't involve bombs or thermite..

But you claim people Jennings was thrown around by an explosive so powerful it was destroying heavy infrastructure and yet he didn't sustain the most common injuries associated with explosives. This shows it can't have been an explosive. Denying that just shows you don't know how explosives work like our friend Liberty on the other thread.

 

[Edx]

I am simply pointing out, that explosive evidence, such as the recently released NIST video of the collapse of 7, where you hear the boom, and then the penthouse disappears,

There is no "boom", it is not how a explosive sounds. I have challenged you guys before, find us an example of an explosive demolition that has the same audio signature as collapse of WTC7. You won't find it, because real demolitions are LOUD.

 

[Craig4]

Why do you continue to harass me, beachnut? We are simply discussing whether or not there was a CD at 7 referring to the 'pull it'. The discussion lead to the point that you didn't think there was any evidence of explosions, so I provided it. There are quite a few eyewitness accounts and vids of explosions. These aren't from 'kooks' but ordinary people, as well as firemen, policemen, and first responders.

You provided no evidence of any explosives used in the WTC on 9/11. Why do you keep lying about this?

 

[Craig4]

Indeed, 3000 that day, and over 100,000 since. I want you to understand what really happened, and the official conspiracy failed. To get to the bottom of this more avenues beg to be explored. I am not saying it was an inside job, or the jews, or anyone else. I'm saying your conspiracy can't be right without any additional evidence. When this happens at a crime scene, the detectives start over with new theories. That is what is needed from the true skeptics in this forum.

I'm here to help afterall.

If any of the above were true your work would not be of such a poor quality. I again note you have not answered my question about how honorable it is to accuse people of things for which you have no evidence.

 

[NoahFence]

Originally Posted by KreeL
For instance:

Secondary explosive devices.

Explosions going off in the lower sections of the towers.

Molten steel in the sublevels.

Bombs in the buildings.

That building is coming down.

I tried to make it into the lobby, and BIG EXPLOSION, blew me back out into the street.

We made back down to the 12th floor and BIG EXPLOSION.

When we got there it looked like a plane had crashed into the lobby.

Etc.

Etc.

Etc....
Exactly.

The fire department had to rescue two people from WTC 7 long before it collapsed.

Clayton - you do realize that explosions that happened "long before it collapsed" would have NOTHING to do with controlled demolition, right?

Or is this yet another in a massively long line of instances where WTCs 1, 2 and 7 looked like "classic controlled demolition" - yet exhibited none of the actual signs of controlled demolition?

You friggin people need a new hobby. Honestly.