Larry Silverstein explaining what he meant by 'pull it'

I dare to say now that there was no explosives found in the dust Larry Silverstein can say that he was "pulling it" all morning long and it doesn't make a difference....
 
The nanothermite theory is officially dead, and the Silverstein 'pull it' obsession of 9/11 Truth remains one of the most fundamentally idiotic myths in the entire truther canon.

'pull it' = controlled demolition is right up there with 'no plane hit the pentagon', and serves only to harm the credibility of 9/11 Truth to the point where only the dangerously uninformed and the seriously deluded will care about it.

9/11 Truth is on its way to zero in terms of credibility and value. That's a simple fact.
 
The more truthers emphasize things like this Silverstein canard, the more they actually harm their cause.

So, kudos to Ergo (KreeL gave up a while ago) for demonstrating how dumb 9/11 Truth really is, and how scientifically inept and intellectually dishonest one has to be to support these myths and urban legends. You've down a heckova job, Ergie! (hat tip to GWB)
 
Sorry if this is beating a dead horse.

I'm not a native English speaker and my spoken English is far worse than my written English, so this may be a non-point since the beginning. However, I must ask mainly in order to be sure myself.

Every time I watch the "pull it" clip, I wonder if he says "pull it" or just "pull" with no "it".



Is it possible at all that he only says "pull" with no "it"? Or even "pulling"?

I just want to know, not to resurrect the topic. I really hope that if it's crystal clear that the "it" is there, then this is put to rest again leaving things as they were before I asked. We've had to many "pull it" threads.
 
pgimeno said:
Sorry if this is beating a dead horse.

I'm not a native English speaker and my spoken English is far worse than my written English, so this may be a non-point since the beginning. However, I must ask mainly in order to be sure myself.

Every time I watch the "pull it" clip, I wonder if he says "pull it" or just "pull" with no "it".



Is it possible at all that he only says "pull" with no "it"? Or even "pulling"?

I just want to know, not to resurrect the topic. I really hope that if it's crystal clear that the "it" is there, then this is put to rest again leaving things as they were before I asked. We've had to many "pull it" threads.
Click to expand...

It does sound like the second "pull" was a naked "pull".

Only a few fringe nuts think "pull" means CD. I wonder how many parents wish they had said "pull it", pulled funding for their kids who turned out to be nuts on 911 issues. 911 truth, not ready for reality.
 
ergo said:
Glad to oblige.

I'm glad you can finally acknowledge the obvious.
Click to expand...
Wait, you actually think you won?

ergo said:
That's hiLARious, DGM! Where is that floor-slapping tiger gif when you need it?

He must have got ALL his facts wrong, then! Right? And FOX news NEVER bothered to correct it! Nor did Silverstein ever demand a correction! Nor have any of the other NYPD officers, Con-Edison workers, firefighters or other journalists he mentions attempted to correct this obvious false claim in the two years since it appeared in FOX news! Wow!

Why don't you write to FOX and let them know?
Click to expand...
ergo said:
You know, when you ask the question "Did Silverstein intentionally demolish WTC 7?" and then are presented with the facts listed above, why is it that bedunkers refuse to use Occam's Razor?

Their only counter-argument is incredulity.
Click to expand...

Noah proceeded to present substantially more than incredulity in response, Ergo, and you ignored him, because you have him on ignore. And so did Edx, which you dismissed out of hand by pretending that you didn't know it was true.

Edx said:
And FYI "pull" is indeed used to refer to firefighters many, many times.
Click to expand...
ergo said:
Show me one.
Click to expand...
Edx said:
I'll show you mine if you show me yours.

No?

One rule for you, right ergo? Well while you will refuse to even show me where the word "pull" is used to refer to explosive demolition I will show you a few occasions where the word "pull" has been used to refer to rescue operations and firefighting.

[quotes here]

Theres plenty more examples but thats enough.

So "pull", "pulling" and "pulled" is used to refer to firefighting.

It is not a stretch to think the FDNY rep called him saying they have to pull the firefighting operation, or "pull it". The "it" being the search and rescue operations. It IS a stretch to think alternatively that Silverstein was using demolition slang (that no one uses) to casually admit (but no one notices) he blew his own building up on 911 aided by the FDNY.

So I ask you again, when is the word "pull" or "pull it" used to refer to explosive demolition?

Go on ergo, try and back up a point for once.
Click to expand...
ergo said:
And yet not one of those examples mentions "pull it".
Click to expand...

You tried to move the goalposts. You ask Edx to prove "pull" is used in firefighting operations, as he claimed, and when he did so, you pointed out that none of them were "pull it", without ever admitting that his claim was correct. In fact, you promptly tried to change the subject.

NoahFence said:
Ergo. You're saying that they loaded that building for demolition only after they found out it was compromised and could potentially collapse. You're saying they did that while it was on fire. You're saying that they doubled the world record while thousands of first responders for outside of the building. You really can't see how insane that is?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
twinstead said:
Still on "Pull It"? Oh, there's something obvious, but it's not what you think it is.
Click to expand...

Could he have said "pullet"? It wouldn't make much sense in context, but neither does the truther claim that he was talking about blowing up the building.

Compare:

"We've had such a great loss of life already, so maybe the best thing to do was blow up the building..."

with,

"We've had such a great loss of life already, so maybe the best thing to do is young chicken..."
 
aggle-rithm said:
Could he have said "pullet"? It wouldn't make much sense in context, but neither does the truther claim that he was talking about blowing up the building.

Compare:

"We've had such a great loss of life already, so maybe the best thing to do was blow up the building..."

with,

"We've had such a great loss of life already, so maybe the best thing to do is young chicken..."
Click to expand...

He was probably ordering KFC for all the firefighters on duty there.
 
tsig said:
He was probably ordering KFC for all the firefighters on duty there.
Click to expand...

Finally!

"We've had such a great loss of life already, so maybe the best thing to do is eat fried chicken"

This makes the most sense of all of them
 
ergo said:
Glad to oblige.

I'm glad you can finally acknowledge the obvious.
Click to expand...

The only thing that's obvious is that none of your kind can put thermite or any explosive at the WTC. Without that arguing over the meaning of "pull it" means nothing. Now either there were explosives planted there or there weren't. Put the explosives at the scene or stop bothering people.
 
I do love ergo's patented "run away from the thread, wait a few weeks, and then act like he won" method. In this case, he does it in the thread itself, which makes it much more convenient to tear the bottom out of his nonsense. Have you noticed that every time he does this sort of thing, the only posts he links to are his own or other truthers? Never the debunker responses, and almost never a quote.
 
Last edited:
We've had such a great loss of life already, so maybe the best thing to do is young chicken...
Click to expand...

I have to say I agree with everyone else, this makes the most sense out of all of them. Is chicken like beef where veal is better than most others? Maybe that's what he's saying? We've had such a terrible loss of life, I feel like high quality chicken
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom