Why does every Truther cherry pick off the cuff comments made during a chaotic event as "evidence" of something? That someone might use "explosion" or "blowing up" as a descriptive term for a crashing burning skyscraper coming down isn't the least bit shocking. Nor is "pull" a demolitions term anywhere other than in Truther fantasy literature.
Again, cherry picking off the cuff comments to suit your POV.
I always wonder this as well. It's not as if people can't get the full transcripts or recordings. Also their identities are know, why not ask them directly what they think?
You are partially right. WTC 7 was his building but the towers were not. He leased them. Leasing is not buying. At the end of the lease you have to give them back in reasonable good repair. He was required by the terms of the lease (PANYNJ being the payee) to insure them for much more than he wanted due to the risk they might be targets of terrorist attack. PANYNJ made him carry so much insurance, this is something he has to pay for. He was required to return their asset (the towers) no matter what. The "06" agreement ment he no longer had to pay for the replacement of the towers but, he could also no longer collect any reimbursement from them. In short, he signed back over everything including the insurance money.
I would have thought a person (like yourself) that has researched this would know this. If you ask nice, I'll include a link to the full text of the agreement and the lease details.
What you are discussing is this later separate action:
“In March 2007 Silverstein appeared at a rally of construction workers and public officials outside of an insurance industry conference to highlight what he describes as the failures of insurers Allianz & Royal and Sun Alliance to pay $800 million in claims related to the attacks. Insurers cite an agreement to split payments between Mr. Silverstein and the Port Authority as a cause for concern.
In July 2006, Silverstein and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey filed a lawsuit against some of its insurers, for refusing to waive requirements of the insurance contracts that Silverstein claimed were necessary to allow renegotiation of the original July 2001 World Trade Center leases. This litigation, was settled together with the federal lawsuits and appraisal, mentioned in the prior paragraph, in a series of settlements announced on May 23, 2007.[26][27][28][29] Silverstein's lease with the Port Authority, for the World Trade Center complex, requires him to continue paying $102 million annually in base rent.[30] He is applying insurance payments toward the redevelopment of the World Trade Center site.[25]
Nothing you quoted supports what you are claiming. All I can figure is you haven't read the whole articles or you don't understand what you are reading.
If you ask nice, I can explain. Don't ask me to prove your silly belief wrong. Anyone reading them can see that for themselves.
Who's telling you what to believe (what web sites)?
I think I see it and one thing is evident. The Tree tops overhang one part of the building. Trees might get to 40 feet high or so. Therefore the roof is below that height.
The Pentagon is 77 feet tall, approx double the height of the school.
The school is about 200 feet long and 100 feet wide.
One wall of the Pentagon is about 800 feet long and due to its pentagonal shape, it presents a 1400 foot wide target.
the Pentagon is one of the world's largest office buildings. It is twice the size of the Merchandise Mart in Chicago, and has three times the floor space of the Empire State Building in New York.
I think I see it and one thing is evident. The Tree tops overhang one part of the building. Trees might get to 40 feet high or so. Therefore the roof is below that height.
The Pentagon is 77 feet tall, approx double the height of the school.
The school is about 200 feet long and 100 feet wide.
One wall of the Pentagon is about 800 feet long and due to its pentagonal shape, it presents a 1400 foot wide target.
The whole thing is goofy. Like a bunch of terrorists are gonna send 767s all over the country hunting down the POTUS. Of course he was safest where he was.
Travis that is not a sound observation. The secret service knew planes were flown to targets....why not target the school, it was public knowledge that he would be there....they targeted the pentagon, which like the school is a ground level target.
The Pentagon is a ground target, 70 feet high? Was the school 70 feet high? The idiot pilot on 77 almost hit the highway, missed it by 20 feet; the idiot pilot would have to fly through trees to hit the other school? Or what?
How would a nut find a small target like a school flying at 500 mph?
Why move the president?
At temperatures above 800° C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Means the office fires destroy the strength of steel before your 1000C office fires, and the 1500C BS you added due to... what?
Steel fails in fire, 911 truth lies about fires. There are no 24 hard facts.
The rule book Dafffyd....it is in the book of common sense. The secret service advises Bush of the first strike at 9.02, they advise him of the second five minutes later....then left him at the school for a further half an hour...don’t be obtuse Daffyd.
Looks like it would be easy to get the president to move without checking things out first if you ran the SS. Run from a secure location, to an ambush in minutes. You would be fired...
I said nothing about which tower the boys were in. The video was in response to your assertion that all the fire-fighters are signed off on the official tale. Re your contentions about the explosions not being explosions....it’s the same as pull it, you overlook the obvious because it does not suit your tale. I will quote the last fire fighters comment:
“PEOPLE DON’T UNDERSTAND, THERE MAY BE MORE, ANY ONE OF THESE BUILDINGS COULD BLOW UP, THIS AINT DONE YET”
Four of the finest on the scene and they talk about secondary explosions.....witnesses with experience of explosions....and they believe there were bombs....and you deflect the testimony with bleatings about the Marriot Hotel. [/quote]
There were no explosives. So? People believe in Bigfoot, with the exact same evidence; talk. Talk is not proof. 911 truth followers, the smart ones leave 911 truth behind when they realize they can think for themselves.
At temperatures above 800° C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Means the office fires destroy the strength of steel before your 1000C office fires, and the 1500C BS you added due to... what?
I never really got the whole molten steel thing from Truthers. Since when do controlled demolitions leave behind pools of molten metal, let alone pools of liquified steel? Is that how the nanothermite drivel came about?
I never really got the whole molten steel thing from Truthers. Since when do controlled demolitions leave behind pools of molten metal, let alone pools of liquified steel? Is that how the nanothermite drivel came about?
WTC collapses due to controlled demolition Steven E. Jones Professor of Physics/BYU
I believe WTC collapses to be due to controlled demolition are: ... 6. The observations of molten metal (I did not say molten steel!) in the basements of all three buildings, WTC 1, 2 and 7 is consistent with the use of the extremely high-temperature thermite reaction: iron oxide + aluminum powder --> Al2O3 + molten iron. Falling buildings are not observed to generate melting of large quantities of molten metal -- this requires a concentrated heat source such as explosives. Even the government reports admit that the fires were insufficient to melt steel beams (they argue for heating and warping then failure of these beams) -- but these reports do not mention the observed molten metal in the basements of WTC1, 2 and 7. Again we have a glaring omission of critical data in the FEMA, NIST and 9-11 Commission reports. ...
Yup. All of the AE911Twoofers have an anti-War/ Bush agenda, just like Jones does. And Truthers fail to objectively research anything, so long as it goes along with their theories, so Jones et al know they can get away with proposing such garbage. That's how they got away with testing 4 imaginary dust samples in a phony laboratory in a guy's garage, publishing those claims in a junk journal and fraudulently printing their bogus paper without the knowledge of the Chief Editor.
I know for a fact that nanothermite wasn't even being produced until 2002, and at that point at an unbelievably slow rate. I remember a debunker on Youtube telling me around 80 grams per week. And I know that Niels Harrit says that at least 100 tons of the stuff would be needed. Am I missing something here?
Not to mention the massive casing it needs, like the only time they ever used thermite in a building demolition - one of the the Chicago World's Fair Sky-ride Towers.
Ah, but the Pentagon is a very easy target to spot. Everyone knows where it is and exactly what it looks like. Despite that the hijackers still almost missed it!
A tiny run of the mill elementary school? Good luck.
Travis>>Incorrect. Steel loses integrity at lower temperatures than that. And office fires are quite capable of this. Read into the fire at the Library tower in LA for a good example of why steel skyscrapers need copious fire insulation.<<
Travis my china plate....did the building you allude to fall to it’s basement....probably not seeing WTC 7 was the first and last....so far....but who knows what the administration has in mind.
Robrob>> Not actually. The Pentagon and WTC were gigantic targets, easily visible from the air at 500 mph.<<
Rob I have a navman in my car, I don’t know how big you place of abode is....but if I type the address in the navman will take me to your door. Same in the air, type in the co ordinates and go.
Robrob>> They soften and sag at a much lower temp, especially under load and not to mention all the jet fuel.<<
Rob, it is simple sport, your utterances have no factual precedent. Look up skyscraper fires.....so many have burnt for longer and on vastly more floors and some in South America burned for days and none fell..and certainly none to the basement....in their own footprint to boot. About “jet fuels”....it is Kerosene Rob with additives....not bloody phosphorus.
Robrob>> As mentioned, the rule book would seek to avoid being channelized into an unsecure route and possible ambush.<<
Don’t be ridiculous Rob. With some understanding I can tell you that if they are burning the nests you take flight. The secret service see all such events as a direct physical threat to the president....two planes into “monuments to modern America” and the service let him sit there for 30 minutes....rubbish....the whole lot was staged.
Likewise, don't pretend your superficial Hollywood based understanding gives you insight into the situation.<<
Robrob>> As I said, I have some understanding apart from google and youtube.
Robrob>> Why does every Truther cherry pick off the cuff comments made during a chaotic event as "evidence" of something? That someone might use "explosion" or "blowing up" as a descriptive term for a crashing burning skyscraper coming down isn't the least bit shocking. Nor is "pull" a demolitions term anywhere other than in Truther fantasy literature.
I wish you had some understanding. Believe it or not even the simplest soul who remonstrate with an interlocutor employ the basic tenets of English. An example.
I am going to pull IT down.
Iam going to pull THEM out.
Now let’s abbreviate them......
PULL IT
PULL THEM
Even children get nouns and pronouns right.
Robrob>> Again, cherry picking off the cuff comments to suit your POV.<<
What can I tell you sport, I offer a genuine video of 4 fire fighters on the spot who say there are explosions....the last says ““PEOPLE DON’T UNDERSTAND, THERE MAY BE MORE, ANY ONE OF THESE BUILDINGS COULD BLOW UP, THIS AINT DONE YET”
Your hopeless Bob, bloody hopeless, god love ya.
Mark>> Lots of things can be like explosions that are not bombs. I once had a car tire blow up in my face (I was deaf for about 10 minutes afterward) - I describe that as an "explosion" but it certainly was not a bomb.<<
Mark the tyre blow out gotta be bad....but it means nothing in terms of perspective....you had a single event as your experience base. From a previous life if I am in range I know the aural difference between a percussion explosion and a bang. I know the difference between a charge and an explosion of contained flammables....So I am absolutely positive that the fire fighters do. Again:
PEOPLE DON’T UNDERSTAND, THERE MAY BE MORE, ANY ONE OF THESE BUILDINGS COULD BLOW UP, THIS AINT DONE YET”
Mark he is talking about buildings that were not on fire, the “may be more” he is alluding to are charges. It is obvious to anyone who knows....
Mark>> Tell you what, why don't you go talk to these men yourself? We know their names, know exactly who they are.<<
That is ludicrous and to what end given we have their real time testimony. They are talking about explosions after the planes hit and before the first tower came down.
Mark>> Now please, if we can get back to it - explain how Larry Silverstein engineered the attack on the Pentagon and the hijacking and crashing of Flight 93 as part of his alleged insurance scam. And don't dodge this question again like you have before.<<
Cmon Mark no force feeding me words, I never said anything close to that, nor did I say he “did it” for the insurance. From my first post to my last I said nothing like that, no ******** please.I have also mentioned Larry’s partner Frank Lowy and you have made no utterance regarding that. He is an interesting man with relevant affiliations.
Do not use alternate spelling to get around the auto-censor.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic Posted By: Lisa Simpson
... Travis my china plate....did the building you allude to fall to it’s basement....probably not seeing WTC 7 was the first and last....so far....but who knows what the administration has in mind. ...
? Many high rises have been totaled by fire. Are you saying the WTC fires were not big enough, hot enough. There was more heat from the fires, just the office fires than 2,600 TONS of thermite has. More heat then the delusion of 911 truth. Hard facts make 911 truth "hard facts" idiotic delusions.
One Meridian Plaza, totaled by fire.
Windsor in Spain, totaled by fire.
These fires were fought, and they failed to save the buildings.
Rob I have a navman in my car, I don’t know how big you place of abode is....but if I type the address in the navman will take me to your door. Same in the air, type in the co ordinates and go.
...
LOL, go ahead get a 767 and your GPS and try to hit a school. The 4 worse pilots in the world, so bad they all crashed on 911 are after the president? Have you flown a large jet, or any jet at 300 knots on the deck and identified any targets the size of the school? Have you? No.
They hit large buildings, they were not very good, they need large targets that stick up 77 to 1300 feet. How tall was the school?
Why would UBL target a school? Did you read his interviews? No? Why not?
Rob, it is simple sport, your utterances have no factual precedent. Look up skyscraper fires.....so many have burnt for longer and on vastly more floors and some in South America burned for days and none fell..and certainly none to the basement....in their own footprint to boot. About “jet fuels”....it is Kerosene Rob with additives....not bloody phosphorus. ...
Bringing up the Jet fuel, with only 630 TONS of thermite in heat energy is trivial compared to the office fires equal to more heat in 2,600 TONS of thermite. Did you do the math? No? Why not?
Office fires have destroyed many buildings.
Windsor, and One Meridian Plaza, totaled by fire.
How did fires sag steel? How did you get the temperatures wrong?
The hard fact is fire destroys the strength of steel quickly. Here we have a high rise totaled by fire, and the fire was fought. WTC 1, 2, 7 and more were totaled by fire on 911; the same as most buildings where fires are not fought.
Why do 911 truthers not know about steel? Ignorance or gullibility?
Don’t be ridiculous Rob. With some understanding I can tell you that if they are burning the nests you take flight. The secret service see all such events as a direct physical threat to the president....two planes into “monuments to modern America” and the service let him sit there for 30 minutes....rubbish....the whole lot was staged. ...
wish you had some understanding. Believe it or not even the simplest soul who remonstrate with an interlocutor employ the basic tenets of English. An example.
I am going to pull IT down.
Iam going to pull THEM out.
Now let’s abbreviate them......
PULL IT
PULL THEM
Even children get nouns and pronouns right.
...
Mark the tyre blow out gotta be bad....but it means nothing in terms of perspective....you had a single event as your experience base. From a previous life if I am in range I know the aural difference between a percussion explosion and a bang. I know the difference between a charge and an explosion of contained flammables....So I am absolutely positive that the fire fighters do. Again:
PEOPLE DON’T UNDERSTAND, THERE MAY BE MORE, ANY ONE OF THESE BUILDINGS COULD BLOW UP, THIS AINT DONE YET”
Mark he is talking about buildings that were not on fire, the “may be more” he is alluding to are charges. It is obvious to anyone who knows....
...
- seriously, you are using quote-mined nonsense from 911 truth to support nothing?
No, the firemen don't know what caused the sound. Wait, they do, if you go past the quote-mining lies.
Following are 16 WTC first responder descriptions of explosive noises well before the towers collapsed:
"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
That is ludicrous and to what end given we have their real time testimony. They are talking about explosions after the planes hit and before the first tower came down. ...
There were no explosives, what is your point? Are you trying to prove witnesses are unable to figure out what caused the sounds? You failed to back up the quote-mining with facts, hard facts.
How many witnesses saw explosives go off? How many were killed by explosives? Zero. oops
Are you trying to support some of the 24 lies made by 911 truth? or what?
Robrob>> Not actually. The Pentagon and WTC were gigantic targets, easily visible from the air at 500 mph.<<
Rob I have a navman in my car, I don’t know how big you place of abode is....but if I type the address in the navman will take me to your door. Same in the air, type in the co ordinates and go.
Robrob>> They soften and sag at a much lower temp, especially under load and not to mention all the jet fuel.<<
Rob, it is simple sport, your utterances have no factual precedent. Look up skyscraper fires.....so many have burnt for longer and on vastly more floors and some in South America burned for days and none fell..and certainly none to the basement....in their own footprint to boot. About “jet fuels”....it is Kerosene Rob with additives....not bloody phosphorus.
Please cite the buildings. Then feel free to elaborate on how they were constructed in comparison to the WTC.
Robrob>> As mentioned, the rule book would seek to avoid being channelized into an unsecure route and possible ambush.<<
Don’t be ridiculous Rob. With some understanding I can tell you that if they are burning the nests you take flight. The secret service see all such events as a direct physical threat to the president....two planes into “monuments to modern America” and the service let him sit there for 30 minutes....rubbish....the whole lot was staged.
If you did you wouldn't be presenting fantasy as fact.
Robrob>> Why does every Truther cherry pick off the cuff comments made during a chaotic event as "evidence" of something? That someone might use "explosion" or "blowing up" as a descriptive term for a crashing burning skyscraper coming down isn't the least bit shocking. Nor is "pull" a demolitions term anywhere other than in Truther fantasy literature.<<
I wish you had some understanding. Believe it or not even the simplest soul who remonstrate with an interlocutor employ the basic tenets of English. An example.
I am going to pull IT down.
Iam going to pull THEM out.
Now let’s abbreviate them......
PULL IT
PULL THEM
Even children get nouns and pronouns right.
People regularly mangle sentences in an even moderately stressful moment. Your comment reveals a peculiar lack of understanding.
Robrob>> Again, cherry picking off the cuff comments to suit your POV.<<
What can I tell you sport, I offer a genuine video of 4 fire fighters on the spot who say there are explosions....the last says ““PEOPLE DON’T UNDERSTAND, THERE MAY BE MORE, ANY ONE OF THESE BUILDINGS COULD BLOW UP, THIS AINT DONE YET”
Again, you cherry picked a random comment made by four out of how many firefighters? Are you familiar with the concept of "Confirmation Bias?"
From a previous life if I am in range I know the aural difference between a percussion explosion and a bang. I know the difference between a charge and an explosion of contained flammables....So I am absolutely positive that the fire fighters do.
Regardless, you are still cherry picking a random comment from one out of many firefighters.
Mark>> Tell you what, why don't you go talk to these men yourself? We know their names, know exactly who they are.<<
That is ludicrous and to what end given we have their real time testimony. They are talking about explosions after the planes hit and before the first tower came down.
? Many high rises have been totaled by fire. Are you saying the WTC fires were not big enough, hot enough. There was more heat from the fires, just the office fires than 2,600 TONS of thermite has. More heat then the delusion of 911 truth. Hard facts make 911 truth "hard facts" idiotic delusions.
So you consider yourself a wordsmith BN, what is "totaled by fire?" If it it structurally fall down to basement level in its own footprint then we have a comparison....if not we have a singular exception given Bld 7 is the only fire ravaged steel framed high rise to do it.
Have you flown a large jet, or any jet at 300 knots on the deck and identified any targets the size of the school? Have you? No.
I have never heard any of the Bin Laden’s throw their hands up to 911....you do some reading. BN, regardless of the form of the threat the ss had the president at an unsecure location for 30 minutes after two strikes against America. For all the ss knew a helicopter with a charge on board could be minutes away from the publicized school photo op. Tiger your assertions are ridiculous...safe at the school indeed....
Bringing up the Jet fuel, with only 630 TONS of thermite in heat energy is trivial compared to the office fires equal to more heat in 2,600 TONS of thermite. Did you do the math? No? Why not?
Forget about you "paper assertions" tiger in 1996 the British Building Research Establishment and British Steel performed a series of six experiments to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected.
Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800-900° C in three of the tests no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments. I said in my initial posts, the number of "firsts" that had materialize to allow 911 to unfold as it did is is astounding, unbelievable in fact.
Why do 911 truthers not know about steel? Ignorance or gullibility?
There were no explosives, what is your point? Are you trying to prove witnesses are unable to figure out what caused the sounds? You failed to back up the quote-mining with facts, hard facts.
How many witnesses saw explosives go off? How many were killed by explosives? Zero. oops
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
