What happened to WTC 7 again?

Spiderman2 was just a random example that would have no bias either way concerning 9-11 were you can see a firefighter use the term. They say the exact line "Pull it" and that is about a hundred times less baised of a source then the one you link too ANOK.

I said first ask a firefighter they will tell you. I know a few firefighter and have heard them say this many times. They honestly laugh when their hear people talked about that concerning 9-11





[edit on 28-3-2006 by ShadowXIX]

Tango, you beat me to the punch.

ShadowXIX, you must think I'm a fool. I don't remember that part from Spiderman, even though that was a krunk movie. But, I DO remember hearing that guy from the documentary say they were going to "pull" building 6.

You must think I'm a bigger fool if I'm to believe that a fire chief is going to ask a building owner if it's ok to pull out the chief's men. This is real life, homey; the chief would have been concerned about his men's lives. To suggest that he consulted with a building owner first is beyond insane.

No squibs? Then can you explain to me what those little puffs of debris RUNNING UP the building are? Don't worry, I'll link a video so you can see it for yourself...

Originally posted by truthseeka
No squibs? Then can you explain to me what those little puffs of debris RUNNING UP the building are?

Listen your using the term squibs wrong. Squibs are a type of explosives not little puffs of smoke. Squibs are never used in demos they are used in things like movie sets spiderman 2 used squibs. They are NOT used to bring building down

Do you understand what squibs are now?

[edit on 28-3-2006 by ShadowXIX]

SkepticOverlord obviously knows some firefighters.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Read his first post in that thread

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Spiderman2 was just a random example that would have no bias either way concerning 9-11 were you can see a firefighter use the term.

They say the exact line "Pull it" and that is about a hundred times less baised of a source then the one you link too ANOK.
I said first ask a firefighter they will tell you. I know a few firefighter and have heard them say this many times. They honestly laugh when their hear people talked about that concerning 9-11

I don't care what they say in a movie, it's a movie. Since when did ya hoos in hollyweird become experts on firefighter terminology? That guy in the movie who supposedly said "pull it" is an ACTOR! LOL not a fireman.

The link I provided is FAR more credible than you and your silly suggestions that you can't prove. Where is the proof I asked for? Oh yeah, you have none.
You don't trust the site? How about you make some effort to verify what the article is saying, instead of just dismissing it because you don't like the site that is hosting it?

Next time I pass a fire station, there's a few around where I live, I'm going ask them myself what they would say to pull the fire crew out.

I'm also going to try, as much as it will waste my valuable time, to watch spider man so I can see what is said and the context it's said in. Not that it will change my mind, it's just a MOVIE, make believe, actors playing firemen.
My guess is he probably says pull out, out can sound like it.

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
SkepticOverlord obviously knows some firefighters.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Read his first post in that thread

What - where he says this?

"Actually, in the terminology of firefighting and such... "pull it" means to remove the firefighting crews and let the building burn, make no attempt to save it. It does not mean to pull the building down."

Is there anything besides anecdotal evidence and a movie to back this up?

My guess is he probably says pull out, out can sound like it.

Actually, he must first consult the building owner first before making a decision to pull his firemen out first.

Ah! You're right. If the fireman said "pull it", that proves the movie is bogus.
It has to come from the building owner

Take the time to ask a firefighter and that will hopefully be all the proof you need.

If you still dont believe me here email these people

www.implosionworld.com...

and ask them if 'pull it' is an industry term for 'demolish'

These people are experts in the field and dont even mention 9-11 they have no reason to lie too you.

Or even go to a firefighter forum and ask them what "pull it" means.

www.firefightersforums.com...

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Listen your using the term squibs wrong.

This is all semantics, dude. You know exactly what he means.

Btw, I like how you ignored the main part of my last post. I kind of expected you would do that, but oh well.

Don't waste your time asking firefighters what "pull it" means, ask demolition experts..... not all firefighters will agree, some will, but I'm sure all demolition experts will.

Fire Chiefs WILL not ask the building owner if it's ok to pull their firefighters out of a building....

Untill you address this obvious fact ShadowXIX you're wasting your time trying to convince anyone what you say is worth any effort of investigation.

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Take the time to ask a firefighter and that will hopefully be all the proof you need.

If you still dont believe me here email these people

www.implosionworld.com...

and ask them if 'pull it' is an industry term for 'demolish'

These people are experts in the field and dont even mention 9-11 they have no reason to lie too you.

Or even go to a firefighter forum and ask them what "pull it" means.

www.firefightersforums.com...

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Listen your using the term squibs wrong.

This is all semantics, dude. You know exactly what he means.

Btw, I like how you ignored the main part of my last post. I kind of expected you would do that, but oh well.

No its not semantics hes using the word completely wrong. Anyone that has ever worked with squibs is going to laugh if they hear you say you saw squibs used in bringing the WTC down

After you suggested secret clean mini nukes could have been used I wasnt going to waste my time.

[edit on 28-3-2006 by ShadowXIX]

Originally posted by promomag
Don't waste your time asking firefighters what "pull it" means, ask demolition experts..... not all firefighters will agree, some will, but I'm sure all demolition experts will.

Oh yes dont waste your time asking them great advice for anyone looking for the truth on the subject.

I linked to demolition experts aswell anyway ask them please.

I'd like to point out that Silverstein clearly says: "...and they made that decision, to pull..."

Notice the "THEY"?

As in, the FD commander called Silverstein and said he wasn't sure they could contain the fires.
Silverstein suggests the smartest thing may be to "pull it".

"And THEY made that decision, to pull..."


You may continue arguing about what "pull it" meant.

Just wanted to clear up that little fact.

Just continue to ignore why the Fire Cheif would ask the building owner to pull his firefighting team out of the building.... please. Then ask yourself why ANYONE would take YOUR advice to ask a firefighter anything.

Comedy.

Originally posted by ShadowXIX

Originally posted by promomag
Don't waste your time asking firefighters what "pull it" means, ask demolition experts..... not all firefighters will agree, some will, but I'm sure all demolition experts will.

Oh yes dont waste your time asking them

great advice for anyone looking for the truth on the subject.

I linked to demolition experts aswell anyway ask them please.

This is actually more similar to WTC 1 and 2

www.implosionworld.com...

Check out the Southwark Towers.... note the LOUD explosions before the buildings even begin to fall.

They also have an interesting forum, one is dedicated to WTC 7 - Interesting discussion so far... but looks like it was abandoned by those who could claim it was not demolished.... keep an eye on it in any case.

www.implosionworld.com...

Please read quango post right above yours.

heres the guys exact qoute

I remember getting a call from the, er, 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 we watched the building collapse

Notice they made that decision they just informed the guy what was goin on in his building.

Originally posted by promomag


They also have an interesting forum, one is dedicated to WTC 7 - Interesting discussion so far... but looks like it was abandoned by those who could claim it was not demolished.... keep an eye on it in any case.

www.implosionworld.com...

Thanks for pointing out that thread

In reference to if WTC7 was a demo

From the Administrator

Several I-world staff keep hoping that some day we'll have the time to list all of the reasons why the assertion is, to put it delicately, ludicrously assinine

There are a million logistical and common sense things that preclude explosive demolition on the WTC site. Whether our gov't is corrupt, or it "looked" similar to an implosion, or "secret files" were in WTC #7, or some guy Silverstein with no demo experience or site authority said "Pull it", or whatever....that could all be true. However it's all completely irrelevant to the the irrefutable physical evidence that explosives were not involved in the collapses. It just didn't happen that way. Didn't happen.

OK...

I'll ask it this way. What were those funny little puffy things that ran up the building right before it started to collapse?

And, if THEY made the decision to pull, why did THEY need HIM to say maybe the smartest thing to do is pull? Are fire chiefs dumb? Is Silverstein a super genius? Are firefighters and chiefs not capable of making these kinds of decisions without the owner of a building suggesting it?

See, it would make more sense if the FIRE CHIEF had said that would be the smart thing to do. It would make sense that he would consult the guy whose building was being destroyed, NOT the other way around. It would also make more sense if Silverstein came out and clarified himself. Of course, he won't, and they also won't release video from the Pentagon. Don't you like the govt pattern of confiscating video evidence in some cases and not releasing it?

I can see where you're coming from ShadowXIX, however why this ever made public attention is BEYOND ME in the first place... IT is currious that the commander would even Consult the building owner and take his suggestion on any account, you can either contain it or you can't. You don't go and bow your head to the building owner and say....

"were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire..."

We're? We're? Where is the leadership of the command. It should be, your building is toast, there is nothing more we can do, my fire team is evacuating the building and me and my team are going to let it burn out, down and or collapse.

Furthermore.... why would the fire department EVEN try to put out a fire in an unstable building in the First Place, they would immediately know that it was going to collapse due to the structural damage as you, BigTrain and everyone else that say otherwise?

See... just more and more questions......

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Please read quango post right above yours.

heres the guys exact qoute

I remember getting a call from the, er, 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 we watched the building collapse

Notice they made that decision they just informed the guy what was goin on in his building.

[edit on 28-3-2006 by promomag]

[edit on 28-3-2006 by promomag]