Could WTC 7 have been pulled?

[Gavron]

But you can't show evidence of a burning 20+ story building ever being "pulled" before? Or after? Why is that?

 

[A W Smith]

Please read the following sentence many times or have someone read it to you untill you understand it.

I am stating the fire commander used PULL as a term to bring down the building.

In This video Luis Mendez tells us that

we had to be very careful how we demolished building six, We were worried about building six coming down and then damaging the slurry walls so we wanted that particular building to fall within a certain area.

now why would they use cables to demolish a building only nine story's tall yet be unconcerned with blasting building seven which was 47 story's tall and was right next to the same slurry wall?

Due to the fact that the only reason for the fire commander to call Silverstein was to tell him they could not save the building (Silverstein had no authority over what was going on that day.

Also due to the facts as stated by 2 fire chiefs the firemen were out of the building early in the day so he could not have been talking about the firemen when he stated PULL IT.

from
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

Silverstein's spokesperson, Mr. McQuillan, later clarified:

"In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building."
​

He could be lying, right? But here is the corroborating evidence...

"They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down." - Richard Banaciski
​

 

[GlennB]

...

Well as most people with basic intelligence know other countris do not have the building codes we do. Also was the buidling all steel or stele and concrete?

NO steel building in the US has collapsed from fire.

Does the USA have the top (most rigorous) building codes in the world? Is this what you are saying? How about Germany, or Sweden? Or are you just saying some other countries have worse building codes? Iraq? Guatemala? Liechtenstein ?
You really are gibbering somewhat. Please make your points clearer. So far you're just insulting my "basic intelligence".

 

[ULTIMA1]

from
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

Even more evidence the firemen were pulled out 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.

 

[Gavron]

...yet still no evidence of a 20+ story burning building ever being "pulled" before, or after 9/11.

You can argue all you want about who can authorize it or not....but if its never been done before, it doesnt change the fact that its never been done before. (or since).

 

[Mangoose]

Gee, one thing you sure do not understand is how to research and get information from professionals.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html
It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C.4 This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse. It was noted above that the wind load controlled the design allowables. The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.

LOL....you end your quote right there, omitting what the author says next: "The additional problem was distortion of the steel in the fire. The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire."

What was it you were just saying about not understanding how to research and get information from professionals?????

 

[PhantomWolf]

Even more evidence the firemen were pulled out BEFORE the phone call.

You are aware that it was not Chief Nigro that rang Silverstein and therefore his decision on the matter has zero relevance to when the phone call was placed? Nor does it comment on what Silverstein knew at the time of suggesting the firemen were pulled out.

BTW still waiting to heard that recording of the phone call or the Transcripts, you got them somewhere?

 

[bje]

NO, my "pull it" statement is based on facts and evidence i can show, maybe you should try it sometime.

Your "pull it" statement came from the government-subsidized media, namely PBS.

How are you going to get out of that fact, Ultima1?

 

[johnny karate]

Yes, i know. It was the incident commad (IC) that made the decision to bring down the building.

Silverstein had not authority, specailly over pulling the firemen.

PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY SOMETHING AS INNOCUOUS AS THE DEMOLISHING OF A DAMAGED BUILDING FOR SAFETY PURPOSES WOULD BE KEPT SECRET FROM THE PUBLIC.

It's a glaring hole in your theory that has been pointed out to you countless times, and yet you refuse to address it. NO ONE is on record saying WTC7 was demolished for safety reasons. EVERYONE involved states it collapsed on its own due to damage and fire. WHY WOULD THESE PEOPLE LIE?

 

[Bobert]

Excellent post A. W. Smith (#202)!

 

[Gavron]

Even more evidence the firemen were pulled out 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.

Notice he said WTC 7 collapsed. He did not say WTC7 was pulled.

 

[A W Smith]

Notice he said WTC 7 collapsed. He did not say WTC7 was pulled.

Even Silverstein in the infamous quote says collapse.

"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse." –Larry Silverstein

notice he did not say "and we watched them pull the building down" or "and we watched the demolition commence"

 

[Grizzly Bear]

notice he did not say "and we watched them pull the building down" or "and we watched the demolition commence"

[sarc]They had to hide it after just confessing it on national television... didn't you read the NWO memo? [/sarc]

 

[A W Smith]

[sarc]They had to hide it after just confessing it on national television... didn't you read the NWO memo? [/sarc]

You know what this forum needs? truther mode brackets that put a gif of a tin foil hat wearing gnome as opening quote and close quote with the same gif but a red circle and slash through it. Or just two tin hat gnomes with their backs facing each other

 

[I Ratant]

One of the locals....

 

[Disenchanted]

ULTIMA1 in one post:

Last time i checked a fire chief or fire commander is not a demolition professional.

ULTIMA1 in another post:

Who said non-experts knocked down the building. ALl i said was the fire commander decided to do it?

This seems contradictory to me.

Why would someone who is not a demolition expert be the one to make the decision to demolish a building? Would he not at least consult with experts?

Might they tell him it would be unwise and not possible given how long it takes to demolish an unstable building with explosives?

Might they tell him that pull is not a demolition term for demolishing with explosives?

ULTIMA1, it also appears you either missed or ignored post 117. So here are some questions from that post so you may answer them:

In your time did you ever hear pull as a term to demolish a building with explosives or whatever you believe was used?

How could they safely rig a building with an out of control fire?

Do you have any evidence of fire commanders using “pull” to demolish a building with explosives or any way other than with cables?

How would they understand “pull” to mean demolish a building with explosives or any way other than with cables when it had not been used that way before?

What other ways do you propose could have been used to bring it down?

Have you found any credible evidence in your research?

 

[sts60]

Exactly it was totaled BUT DID NOT COLLAPSE.

No steel building has ever collaposed from fire no matter how severe. (according to firemen and fire experts).

What's especially pathetic is that poor Ultima1 actually acknowledged the example of the Kader Toy Factory collapse (even while whining because it wasn't in the U.S.), but is evidently incapable of retaining this example from one page of this thread to the next. I'd say it's amusing, but really it's rather sad and depressing.

And, of course, firefighters certainly do not say what he claimed. Quite the opposite, in fact. We are well aware that steel buildings can and have collapsed. For those interested, I would recommend Strategic and Tactical Considerations on the Fireground, by James Smith. This was the text used in our training on building construction and collapse and discusses the failure of steel structures in reasonable depth, with examples.

 

[sts60]

You mean the videos that show dark, heavy black smoke that means a fire is burning at a low temp?

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/fires/severity.html
Dark smoke implies the presence of soot, which is composed of uncombusted hydrocarbons. Soot is produced when a fire is oxygen-starved, or has just been extinguished. Soot also has a high thermal capacity and may act to rob a fire of heat by carrying it away.

You mean the videos that show the fires going out well before the collapse?

Those videos?

I used to snicker when I read the "black smoke" posts like this. Now, I... well, I still snicker.



This is black smoke from a house burn we had not long ago. (After we went through the various evolutions inside, all the boarded-up windows are knocked out - leaving completely unimpeded ventilation throughout - and the whole thing was lit off.)

As you can see, the fire was definitely going out in this oxygen-starved house.

(The floor collapsed into the basement about half an hour or so after this shot. I guess somebody ran in with explosives or something while I wasn't looking.)

 

[Athyrio]

..........(The floor collapsed into the basement about half an hour or so after this shot. I guess somebody ran in with explosives or something while I wasn't looking.)

HAHAHA.

You is bad.

Great post, by the way.

 

[ULTIMA1]

You are aware that it was not Chief Nigro that rang Silverstein and therefore his decision on the matter has zero relevance to when the phone call was placed?

Wrong again. If the firemen would have still been in the building when the call was made then Chief Nigro would have been told by the fire commander to pull the firemen out.

His statement stands as evidence that the firemen were out of the buidling before the call to Silverstein.