• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged "Pull It" (Stop yawning people!)

SatansMaleVoiceChoir said:
We too have such futuristic high technology as shredders; the petrol (and grenade) were for emergencies. A big, glowing red button under a protective case marked 'Self Destruct! Emergency Only' would have been much more exciting though... That's the problem; the truth is usually so plain and 'unsexy', whereas 'the twoof' is exciting and complex (and far-fetched, and influenced by too many films).
Click to expand...

Actually, I think the agency I work in uses the pulping method; only reason I say that is that I keep seeing bags labeled "nonpulpable material". But then again, we call the bags with pulpable material "burn bags", so your guess is as good as mine how this agency does it. *L* I do know my unit shreds stuff though.
 
Sabrina said:
A: You can blame my work computer (stupid NWO always going with the lowest bidder).

B: Drop and give me 50 SERGEANT. ;)
Click to expand...


you better be standing at parade rest when you chew my butt, ma'am!!

back on track, I've been on a tank since 1998, and for the life of me, still haven't found the magical blow up button ANYWHERE in that bad boy. I consulted the owner's manual, General Dynamics customer service, looked in the glove box, that secret area that holds the spare tire and jack, nothing!

I did find the instructions on what to do in the event the tank becomes disabled and must be abandoned, so in order to prevent it from falling into the hands of the enemy, you drop 4 incinderary grenades in the fuel tanks and one down the gun tube.

Now all I gotta do is find the button that makes that happen. Oh wait... here it is, it's marked "Hey, Private..."
 
So... who wants to bet Apollo ignores us and proceeds like he never said anything wrong?
 
Unsecured Coins said:
you better be standing at parade rest when you chew my butt, ma'am!!

back on track, I've been on a tank since 1998, and for the life of me, still haven't found the magical blow up button ANYWHERE in that bad boy. I consulted the owner's manual, General Dynamics customer service, looked in the glove box, that secret area that holds the spare tire and jack, nothing!

I did find the instructions on what to do in the event the tank becomes disabled and must be abandoned, so in order to prevent it from falling into the hands of the enemy, you drop 4 incinderary grenades in the fuel tanks and one down the gun tube.

Now all I gotta do is find the button that makes that happen. Oh wait... here it is, it's marked "Hey, Private..."
Click to expand...

I used to be on tanks for a while too. Once again, in the event of an emergency which required the wagon be left behind, the "Mk 1 Tool - Light Adjustment" (Hammer) was the equivalent of a 'self destruct' button; smash the radios, pour petrol all over the inside of the turret; add fire. Open back decks, tap a few key engine parts with "Mk 2 Tool - Heavy Adjusting" (sledgehammer), add petrol and fire.
 
Apollo:

"Edited to add: Interestingly LS refers to the loss of life on that day. In LS's mind "pulling" WTC 7 was done to save lives. However, I believe there was nobody in WTC 7 at the time LS spoke to the fire commander. The fire commander presumably knew this, but did not correct LS; thus the fire commander knew what LS meant by "pull it.""

I am sorry, this is simply not true, but rather is part of a systematic campaign by certain posters on this site to perpetuate the claim that the Silverstein talked to the FDNY after the crews had been “pulled” back out of the collapse zone (interesting use of the word “pulled” in that last sentence, wouldn’t you agree? Conveys the concept of “retreating from a zone of danger” quite clearly and naturally.... but I digress).

I have repeatedly requested evidence from people claiming that they “believe there was nobody in WTC 7 at the time LS spoke to the fire commander,” and it has never been forthcoming. What I have seen are claims that the FDNY pulled out of WTC7 long before they actually did, which claims have been debunked on this very site.

I think your belief is based on reading posts from a Truther on this site with a major dislike of Silverstein, yet no evidence to support that truther’s claims.
 
SatansMaleVoiceChoir said:
I used to be on tanks for a while too. Once again, in the event of an emergency which required the wagon be left behind, the "Mk 1 Tool - Light Adjustment" (Hammer) was the equivalent of a 'self destruct' button; smash the radios, pour petrol all over the inside of the turret; add fire. Open back decks, tap a few key engine parts with "Mk 2 Tool - Heavy Adjusting" (sledgehammer), add petrol and fire.
Click to expand...


are you sledgehammer qualified?
 
Funny, lot's of comments based on opinions about one part of my post, but very little on the nub of my argument which is this:

We have the LOGICAL sequence:

1. That the fire could not be contained.
2. That LS thought it was time to "pull it".
3. A decision was made to "pull it".
4. The building collapsed.

Now what I see here is that the "pulling" RESULTED in the collapse. The word "and" in the phrase "they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse" logically connects the decision to pull with the observed result - WTC 7 collapsed.

Cause (pull it) -> Effect (collapse)

LS did NOT say: "We made the decision to pull, THEN the building collapsed.

In fact LS expresses no surprise that the building collapsed after the decision to pull (it). He did NOT say: "We made the decision to pull and to our surprise the building collapsed." Nor does he say: "We made the decision to pull, to let the fire burn itself out, but the building suddenly collapsed." No! LS makes it clear that the building collapsed because of the decision to "pull it".
 
Unsecured Coins said:
back on track, I've been on a tank since 1998, and for the life of me, still haven't found the magical blow up button ANYWHERE in that bad boy. I consulted the owner's manual, General Dynamics customer service, looked in the glove box, that secret area that holds the spare tire and jack, nothing!

I did find the instructions on what to do in the event the tank becomes disabled and must be abandoned, so in order to prevent it from falling into the hands of the enemy, you drop 4 incinderary grenades in the fuel tanks and one down the gun tube.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think I remember reading in Thunder Run that they needed to open all the ammunition racks (racks? Proper term?) and also dump whatever explosives they had with them into the crew compartment (after it had been suitably abandoned, of course). In the book, that resulted in them adding a whole bunch of 7.62 and .50 cal rounds from their external machine guns before they threw their grenades in.

Yet, despite doing all that, they still had to have another tank put a main gun round into it. Them M1's are tough. The tank commander or gunner (forget which) was recorded in that book as musing sadly on the fact he had an Abrams kill on his record.
 
SatansMaleVoiceChoir said:
Not on these newer, fancier models; I did the 'Old School' rough-wooden-handle-with-a-big-lump-of-steel-on-the-end six week course back in '90. I spent most of the course drunk in the evenings, so consequently I had to re-sit the theory - but I flew the practical.
Click to expand...

Yeah, nothing beats the "hands on" part of the course
 
[to apollo20]

Isn't that level of analysis pointless when applied to a conversation hazily remembering another conversation?

There are many things he could have meant, and enough very plausible alternatives for the comment in itself to be considered innocent.

If there is evidence of controlled demolition, then the comment is worth reexamining, but it's not a good starting point.
 
Last edited:
Apollo20 said:
No! LS makes it clear that the building collapsed because of the decision to "pull it".
Click to expand...

Yes Frank, because, as you know, steel framed structures are vulnerable to fire (even with intact fireproofing - this stuff doesn't last forever you know?) and pulling any attempt to fight the fires did indeed result in the subsequent collapse of the already badly damaged building.

But keep on trying. It's good to keep the brain active.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
Actually, I think I remember reading in Thunder Run that they needed to open all the ammunition racks (racks? Proper term?) and also dump whatever explosives they had with them into the crew compartment (after it had been suitably abandoned, of course). In the book, that resulted in them adding a whole bunch of 7.62 and .50 cal rounds from their external machine guns before they threw their grenades in.

Yet, despite doing all that, they still had to have another tank put a main gun round into it. Them M1's are tough. The tank commander or gunner (forget which) was recorded in that book as musing sadly on the fact he had an Abrams kill on his record.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they're called ammo racks because the main gun rounds are stored in a "honeycomb" style area. And I do say that my memory may be slipping. I only skimmed the diabling procedures so i might have missed a few things.
 
Apollo20 said:
LS did NOT say: "We made the decision to pull, THEN the building collapsed.
Click to expand...

why does he need to? He is recounting in his observations of that day, what happened. He didn't realize that 3 years after he did the interview that conspiracy loons would use his statement and try to say that he was actually telling the FDNY to blow up his building
 
Apollo20 said:
Funny, lot's of comments based on opinions about one part of my post, but very little on the nub of my argument which is this:

We have the LOGICAL sequence:

1. That the fire could not be contained.
2. That LS thought it was time to "pull it".
3. A decision was made to "pull it".
4. The building collapsed.

Now what I see here is that the "pulling" RESULTED in the collapse. The word "and" in the phrase "they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse" logically connects the decision to pull with the observed result - WTC 7 collapsed.

Cause (pull it) -> Effect (collapse)

LS did NOT say: "We made the decision to pull, THEN the building collapsed.

In fact LS expresses no surprise that the building collapsed after the decision to pull (it). He did NOT say: "We made the decision to pull and to our surprise the building collapsed." Nor does he say: "We made the decision to pull, to let the fire burn itself out, but the building suddenly collapsed." No! LS makes it clear that the building collapsed because of the decision to "pull it".
Click to expand...

I agree (and have from the beginning) that LS choice of words were ambiguous and vague at best. However, for someone who is obviously keen on LOGICAL steps, can you explain WHY WTC7 would need to be destroyed by CD when it was badly damaged and engulfed in flame, HOW it would have been done, and why the only physical characteristics with CD the collapse seems to share is that it ended in a pile of rubble?
 
Apollo:

Well, your comment regarding self destruction was mind boggling.

Anyhow:

"We have the LOGICAL sequence:

1. That the fire could not be contained.
2. That LS thought it was time to "pull it".
3. A decision was made to "pull it".
4. The building collapsed.

Now what I see here is that the "pulling" RESULTED in the collapse. The word "and" in the phrase "they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse" logically connects the decision to pull with the observed result - WTC 7 collapsed.

Cause (pull it) -> Effect (collapse)"

Uh, It seems pretty clear that what you meant to write was:

Cause (the fire could not be contained) -> Effect (collapse)

The whole "pull it" nonsense clearly refers to a secondary cause/ effect:

Cause (the fire could not be contained) -> Effect (pull back everyone from the Zone of Danger).

Think about this part for a while "the fire could not be contained" and I am sure you will agree that the LS thing has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with CD>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom