Could WTC 7 have been pulled?

[Disenchanted]

Then show me where i stated building 7 was pulled with cables or it will show you to be liar and twist post.

Look to what you wrote below. As far as demolishing a building goes, the fire commander would only use the term pulled in regard to pulling a building down with cables..

You say that the fire commander used the term pull in reference to bringing down building 7 and since "pulled" or "pull it" is not a term used for demolishing buildings with explosives, the logical conclusion from your position would be they brought it down with cables.

Maybe the idea of logic is foreign to you.

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.

Due to the fact that the only reason for the fire commander to call Silverstein was to tell him they could not save the buidling (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.

Well again, (no matter how much you dodge the fact) they could not have been talking about demolishing building 7 with explosives because that is not a term used for that. So one thing is clear, whatever the fire chiefs were talking about it was not about demolishing building 7 with explosives.

Once again, you are left with no credible evidence for building 7 being demolished.

 

[ULTIMA1]

Kader Toy Factory.

Is that a steel building in the US?

 

[Thunder]

Then show me where i stated building 7 was pulled with cables or it will show you to be liar and twist post.



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.

Due to the fact that the only reason for the fire commander to call Silverstein was to tell him they could not save the buidling (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.

just because there was no one INSIDE the building doesnt mean there werent tons of folks AROUND the building.

Hence "pull it" means "pull all personnel from around/near WTC 7".

 

[ULTIMA1]

You say that the fire commander used the term pull in reference to bringing down building 7 and since "pulled" or "pull it" is not a term used for demolishing buildings with explosives, .

Last time i checked a fire commander is not a normal demolition expert. Please explain why he could not have used PULL as a demolition term.

Also where did i state it had to be with explosives? You do know there are other ways to bring down a building then using explosives?

 

[ULTIMA1]

just because there was no one INSIDE the building doesnt mean there werent tons of folks AROUND the building.

You guys really should do a little research before posting. NO ONE WAS NEAR THE BUILDING.

Here is still more evidence about the firemen being evacuated away from Building 7.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html
Firehouse: Chief Nigro said they made a collapse zone and wanted everybody away from number 7 did you have to get all of those people out?
Hayden: Yeah, we had to pull everybody back. It was very difficult. We had to be very forceful in getting the guys out. They didn�t want to come out. There were guys going into areas that I wasn�t even really comfortable with, because of the possibility of secondary collapses. We didn�t know how stable any of this area was. We pulled everybody back probably by 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon. We said, this building is going to come down, get back. It came down about 5 o�clock or so, but we had everybody backed away by then.

 

[Athyrio]

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.

Maybe he was talking about the firefighters who were still in the area of WTC7. After all, it was a pretty tall building. Wouldn't want anyone to get in the way. The following is from a conspiracy website:

Building 7 was supposedly evacuated around 9 AM. The area around the building was evacuated in the hour before the collapse. Photographer Tom Franklin, who took the famous photograph of firemen raising the American flag, said:

Firemen evacuated the area as they prepared for the collapse of Building Seven. [SIZE=-1]1 [/SIZE]

You see, they were still in the area whether they were inside or not. Wouldn't they would have to pulled from the area for safety purposes? Silverstein was talking about people.

 

[Thunder]

You guys really should do a little research before posting. NO ONE WAS NEAR THE BUILDING.

Here is still more evidence about the firemen being evacuated away from Building 7.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html
Firehouse: Chief Nigro said they made a collapse zone and wanted everybody away from number 7 We pulled everybody back probably by 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon. We said, this building is going to come down, get back. It came down about 5 o�clock or so, but we had everybody backed away by then.

And there we have it. That is what was "pulled". They pulled everybody back..and then the building came down. So much for the Silverstein quote.

But wait, Silverstein is a Zionist, so even though his quote has finally been explained, the conspiracy must go on!!!

 

[Disenchanted]

Last time i checked a fire commander is not a normal demolition expert. Please explain why he could not have used PULL as a demolition term.

Also where did i state it had to be with explosives? You do know there are other ways to bring down a building then using explosives?

When was the last time you checked and how did you check?

If he is not a "normal" demolition expert why would he be in command of a demolition? Why would he use a term for demolition that no one working it would understand?

Pull is not used by anyone who demolish buildings that is a fact.

Sure there are other ways, like the fire that was responsible for its collapse. There is no evidence for anything else. What other ways do you propose? What evidence do you have to support them?

 

[Thunder]

Maybe he was talking about the firefighters who were still in the area of WTC7. After all, it was a pretty tall building. Wouldn't want anyone to get in the way. The following is from a conspiracy website:

You see, they were still in the area whether they were inside or not. Wouldn't they would have to pulled from the area for safety purposes? Silverstein was talking about people.

No. "Pull it" simply cannot refer to the firemen around WTC 7. It simply can't. Even though the building was several hundred feet high...and could kill folks in every direction for several hundred feet, and folks would have to be pulled away for like 1,000 feet in every direction, "pull it" simply cannot refer to people.

Why..because in truther logic "it" is always an inanimate object...not living things.

Even Silverstein said what "it" referred to in his quote. But that doesnt matter. The truthers know what Silverstein was saying..not Silverstein himself.

 

[ULTIMA1]

When was the last time you checked and how did you check?

I was a federal police officer for 12 years, and trained in Emergency Incident Management.

If he is not a "normal" demolition expert why would he be in command of a demolition? Why would he use a term for demolition that no one working it would understand?

He was in charge of a fire out of control and no water to fight it. He decided to bring the buidling down to keep it from causing anymore damage and to keep fires from spreading to other buildings.

How do yo uknow no one there would not know what he meant, were you there?

Pull is not used by anyone who demolish buildings that is a fact.

Well the fire commader is not a person that usually demolishes buildings is he?

What other ways do you propose? What evidence do you have to support them?

Well as usual since you have not done any researfch into this you probably did not see the video of the hardhat workers coming out of the safety zone around buidling 7 stating that the buidling was coming down.

 

[ULTIMA1]

And there we have it. That is what was "pulled". They pulled everybody back..and then the building came down. So much for the Silverstein quote.
!

Do you know how to read?

The firemen were evacuated back from the building hours before the building collasped. Before the phone call was made.

 

[TJM]

Do you know how to read?

The firemen were evacuated back from the building hours before the building collasped. Before the phone call was made.

What do you think was the reason for that?

 

[ULTIMA1]

What do you think was the reason for that?

Gee, i will try to make this as simple as i can.

They were running out of water, they could not fight the fire so it was decided to evacuate them from the building and away from the area.

BTW: Chief Hayden stated they were worried about fire jumping from building 7, 1 reason they brought down the building.

Then the fire commander made the call to Silverstein to tell him they could not save the building.

 

[TJM]

Gee, i will try to make this as simple as i can.

They were running out of water, they could not fight the fire so it was decided to evacuate them from the building and away from the area.

BTW: Chief Hayden stated they were worried about fire jumping from building 7, 1 reason they brought down the building.

Then the fire commander made the call to Silverstein to tell him they could not save the building.

Uh huh. and when did this happen?

 

[Athyrio]

Gee, i will try to make this as simple as i can.

They were running out of water, they could not fight the fire so it was decided to evacuate them from the building and away from the area.

BTW: Chief Hayden stated they were worried about fire jumping from building 7, 1 reason they brought down the building.

Then the fire commander made the call to Silverstein to tell him they could not save the building.

So, what I gather from this is that the firefighters would have tried to save the building if they had the capability to do so, then decided they could not "save" the building, and that's why they brought it down.

Now how again did they "bring it down" if they had already been evacuated from the area?

 

[bje]

Are you saying Silverstien is a liar and his statment cannot be trusted?

I mean he basilcally stated. The fire commander decided to PULL IT and we watched the building collapse.

Once again, Ultima1 sticks his foot in his mouth.

Apparently, you are unaware that Silverstein made his statement a month or so after 9/11 during an interview with NOVA summarizing the events of that day.

Given that neither the NOVA filming crew, interviewer, nor PBS reacted in any way to the "pull" statement, it's quite clear they understood the context of the comment.

For Ultima1, who wishes us to believe that we "only believe what we are told", it is rather amusing for him to take as his basis for doubt an interview from the government-subsidized PBS, who, if anything, would never want to reveal a demolition so blatantly if the "pull" statement referred to an actual demolition.

Once again, our new Troll represents the absurdity, contradictions, and illogical nature of "9/11 Truth".

How will you get out of your fix this time, Ultima1?

 

[Disenchanted]

I was a federal police officer for 12 years, and trained in Emergency Incident Management.

If you were, well every job has its incompetents.

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

He was in charge of a fire out of control and no water to fight it. He decided to bring the buidling down to keep it from causing anymore damage and to keep fires from spreading to other buildings.

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

Does that mean it did not hit any buildings around it?

That still does not explain why he would use a term that is not used by demolition experts. Do you have any evidence of fire commanders using “pull” to demolish a building with explosives or any way other than with cables?

How do yo uknow no one there would not know what he meant, were you there?

Why would I have to be there? 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?

Well the fire commader is not a person that usually demolishes buildings is he?

So why would he be in command of a demolition in this case when he is by your argument not experienced in demolishing buildings?

Well as usual since you have not done any researfch into this you probably did not see the video of the hardhat workers coming out of the safety zone around buidling 7 stating that the buidling was coming down.

The irony in your posts is amusing. That does not answer my questions. What other ways do you propose could have been used to bring it down?

How are hardhat workers evidence that building 7 was demolished? It is more likely that they could tell that it was weakening due to the fire and would be “coming down.

Have you found any credible evidence in your research?

 

[ULTIMA1]

So, what I gather from this is that the firefighters would have tried to save the building if they had the capability to do so, then decided they could not "save" the building, and that's why they brought it down.

Well we do not know if they could have saved it even if they had water becasue they had let it burn for awhile befire getting to it.

They probably could have saved it if the sprinklers would have been working but the water supply was cut off.

Now how again did they "bring it down" if they had already been evacuated from the area?

As stated earlier there is a video of hard hat workers coming out of the safety zone area, stating that the building is coming down.

 

[Athyrio]

As stated earlier there is a video of hard hat workers coming out of the safety zone area, stating that the building is coming down.

How?


How did the building come down as connected with the hardhats?

 

[Gavron]

Do you know how to read?

The firemen were evacuated back from the building hours before the building collasped. Before the phone call was made.

hours before the building collapsed?

But you just stated this quote from Chief Nigro:

We pulled everybody back probably by 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon. We said, this building is going to come down, get back. It came down about 5 o�clock or so, but we had everybody backed away by then.

Since when is 90 minutes "hours"??