Second, why is it that you keep thinking something else must have happened after some other members and i, proved that those claims you are making,
and those came claims from those websites you gave, are false?
I think not....
You, along with those you think, are not paying attention to what I have said.
How many times do I need to post it in the simplest of forms? If you cant understand it from it's simplest form, then that degree you have is
Funny how quite a few here got what I was saying, and very INTERESTING that one of the biggest debunkers here, that being Howard, not once tried to
debunk my postings on the said issue.If anyone would have done so, it would have been him.But he did not.I think that says something dont you think
Also, I never once said, nor claimed to have a degree in anything.Im not sure why you would assume that.Not everything needs to be figured out by
having a rocket science degree.It is what is called common sense.
Here is a little example for you:
Say there is this tree all by itself.One day this tree falls.Looking at the possibilities, we see that it happened to rain the night before and were
also experiencing high winds.Common sense tells us why and how that tree fell.The rain sofens the ground, the high wind then uproots the tree.
Now lets take that same tree.One day that tree falls.Looking at the possibilities, we see that we had no rain, no wind, and some odd markings on this
tree.Now we have this uprooted tree that was in dry dirt, no wind, and strange marks on it.Common sense would tell us that someone had to have pulled
this tree down.We dont have suffciant proof, but we can be rest assured that wind nor a soft ground allowed it to fall.
Now as I stated, from the FEMA report, Preliminary indications were that, due to lack of water, no manual firefighting actions were taken by FDNY.
-FEMA: WTC Building Performance Study, Chp 5 (05/02)
The whole thing states, "...the firefighters made the decision fairly early on not to attempt to fight the fires, due in part to the damage to WTC 7
from the collapsing towers. Hence, the fire progressed throughout the day fairly unimpeded by automatic or manual suppression activities.
It appears that the sprinklers may not have been effective due to the limited water on site and that the development of the fires was not
significantly impeded by the firefighters because manual firefighting efforts were stopped fairly early in the day.
WTC 7 collapsed approximately 7 hours after the collapse of WTC 1. Preliminary indications were that, due to lack of water, no manual firefighting
actions were taken by FDNY. -FEMA: WTC Building Performance Study, Chp 5 (05/02)
So this tells us, since no firefighters were in building 7 trying to put it out, what or WHOM was pulled if that is what you say the term means?
Now I know there were 'people' around the area.I mean many 'people' were in the area.They werent directly THERE for WTC 7 though.
We know some firefighters were around the area as they were keeping an eye on it to make sure the other 'people' around it, didnt get to close.
This is common sense thinking.It isnt like they blocked off the entire block around WTC 7
But when Larry states PULL IT, he isnt saying, get all the peolpe around that area out of there.He isnt saying PULL those people away.They, the
'people' arent doing anything!They are what you call bystander's.
If he meant to PULL those peole away, he would not have used a term PULL IT
When you see a large crowd of people and a cop trying to get all those people to dispurse, you dont see him say 'Ok everybody, pull it'
EDIT TO ADD:
I just came across this on page 5 in this thread.I thought this might be interesting.You quoted me, then posted your reply...
"I remember getting a call from the, uh, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to
contain the fire, and I said, 'You know we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is, is pull it.' Uh, and they made
that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse."
When he says to pull, he means to pull his people, the firefighters, out and let the building burn. Ask any real firefighters what it means.
Just go to your nearest firefighting station and ask them yourself if you want to make sure....
Now wait a cotten-pickin-minute here
Back then, you were so sure that there were firefighters in the building.
Now later down the line AFTER I show you FACT that there werent ANY firefighters in the building, you change up and say NOW that he means to get all
the people in the street around BLD 7 to get out of there....man, not even to sure about your own claims are you
You changed your mine from PULL IT meaning get OUT, to pull the firefighters out, to now meaning pull people away from the SURROUNDING area.
Thats tasty, real tasty
[edit on 30-6-2005 by SMR]