It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

9/11 WTC Video

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Ultima...the point i am making is that the term "pulled" in controlled demolitions is used when using cables to take down an already weakened building. It does NOT mean via explosives.

Brent Blanchard, a demolitions expert with Protec, and contributor to ImplosionWorld.com, weighs in with his expert opinion:


We have never once heard the term 'pull it' being used to refer to the explosive demolition of a building, and neither has any blast team we've spoken with. The term is used in conventional demolition circles, to describe the specific activity of attaching long cables to a pre-weakened building and maneuvering heavy equipment (excavators, bulldozers etc) to 'pull' the frame of the structure over onto its side for further dismantlement.


Brent Blanchard works for the largest demo company in the world! HE has worked with EVERY...repeat EVERY demolition company in the United States.

[edit on 9-12-2006 by CameronFox]




posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
Ultima...the point i am making is that the term "pulled" in controlled demolitions is used when using cables to take down an already weakened building. It does NOT mean via explosives.

Brent Blanchard, a demolitions expert with Protec, and contributor to ImplosionWorld.com, weighs in with his expert opinion:


We have never once heard the term 'pull it' being used to refer to the explosive demolition of a building, and neither has any blast team we've spoken with. The term is used in conventional demolition circles, to describe the specific activity of attaching long cables to a pre-weakened building and maneuvering heavy equipment (excavators, bulldozers etc) to 'pull' the frame of the structure over onto its side for further dismantlement.


Brent Blanchard works for the largest demo company in the world! HE has worked with EVERY...repeat EVERY demolition company in the United States.

[edit on 9-12-2006 by CameronFox]


Simply "PULL" as a term means to bring down a building as used by the fire chief when talking to Silverstein.



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Ultima... No..your wrong. What DON'T you understand? Silverstein did NOT make the decision to "pull". Nigro and other officals at the scene did.
And by PULL ..it was the operations that were doing on near wtc7. Rescue efforts from the rubble was HAULTED for hours after Nigro made the decision to PULL the operation.

Did you READ the quote from Mr. Blanchard??

Are you saying Silverstien and Nigro have a relationship where they have their own jargon for terms for demolishing a building?

[edit on 9-12-2006 by CameronFox]



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
Ultima... No..your wrong. What DON'T you understand? Silverstein did NOT make the decision to "pull". Nigro and other officals at the scene did.
And by PULL ..it was the operations that were doing on near wtc7. Rescue efforts from the rubble was HAULTED for hours after Nigro made the decision to PULL the operation.

Did you READ the quote from Mr. Blanchard??

Are you saying Silverstien and Nigro have a relationship where they have their own jargon for terms for demolishing a building?

[edit on 9-12-2006 by CameronFox]



Yes i know the incident commander decided to PULL the building after telling Silverstien the condition of the building and after the firemen were out of the building. As i have stated i have training in Emergency Incident Command. Silverstein had no authority to tell the fire chief what to do with the firemen or the building.

The firemen were pulled out of builidng 7 for hours before the builidng came down,, unless your saying the call to Silverstien was made while the firemen were still in the bulding when they decided to "PULL" the building.

"PULL" is just a simple term for bringing down a building.

[edit on 9-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 9-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 11:57 AM
link   
The Firemen were PULLED starting at approx. 2:30pm. The building collasped at 5:20 pm. 3 hours actually.

Chief Nigro with other officals on the scene decided to PULL the operations. NOT the building. The call to Silverstein was prior to the end of the operations.

Considering not one person died during the collapse of WTC7. I would say it was a VERY smart thing to do.

I'm not sure what your saying. Do you think Nigro was involved in wtc7's "controlled demolition?"



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
The Firemen were PULLED starting at approx. 2:30pm. The building collasped at 5:20 pm. 3 hours actually.

Chief Nigro with other officals on the scene decided to PULL the operations. NOT the building. The call to Silverstein was prior to the end of the operations.

Considering not one person died during the collapse of WTC7. I would say it was a VERY smart thing to do.

I'm not sure what your saying. Do you think Nigro was involved in wtc7's "controlled demolition?"


Yes chief Nigro pulled the firemen out of the builidng. Then the call was made to Sivlerstien to tell him the conditoin of the building and the fire chief and the incident commander decided to "PULL" the building while talking to Silverstein.

The Incident Commander decided to "PULL" the building, as far as who actullly brought the building down is unknown.

I have e-mailed some of the demo and wreaking companies that were thier to see what company had the contract to PULL building 6 and if the same or different company ad the contract for building 7.






[edit on 9-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 9-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Yes chief Nigro pulled the firemen out of the builidng. Then the call was made to Sivlerstien to tell him the conditoin of the building and the fire chief and the incident commander decided to "PULL" the building while talking to Silverstein.

The Incident Commander decided to "PULL" the building, as far as who actullly brought the building down is unknown.

I have e-mailed some of the demo and wreaking companies that were thier to see what company had the contract to PULL building 6 and if the same or different company ad the contract for building 7.


Do have ANY sources that back up your last post. You know what time Silverstein was called?

No need to e-mail anyone. Protec did the mechanical pull of WTC6.

www.implosionworld.com...

www.protecservices.com...








[edit on 9-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 9-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
No need to e-mail anyone. Protec did the mechanical pull of WTC6.


No they didn't. Here is an e-mail to me from Stacy Loizeaux from Controlled Demolition, Inc.


This structure was demolished by, we think, a company named NACERIMA. We understand they used a combination of a crane with a heavy steel slab to shear out column connections by dropping this slab next to columns and with demolition attachments like grapples and shears mounted on large hydraulic excavators. We weren’t involved, but I think this was the technique used.

Regards,
======================
Stacey S. Loizeaux
The Loizeaux Group, LLC
Controlled Demolition, Inc.
2737 Merryman's Mill Road
Phoenix, Maryland 21131 USA
+1-410-667-6610
+1-410-667-6624 fax


Just for reference, here is the original e-mail I sent to them.


To whom it may concern,

I was wondering how the building 6 of the World Trade Center was demolished. I have been hearing conflicting versions. Can someone clear this up for me. I am a structural engineer interested in demolition exercises. I know that part of the demolition was tricky because of the slurry wall. Thanks in advance for your cooperation in answering my question.


Ex

posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 02:56 PM
link   
I have a guestion..........

If there was a secondary explosion from
inside of the building,wouldn't
it have blown out .and the building fall outwards
from a specific point ??

Why DID they IMPLODE and fall ????



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ex
If there was a secondary explosion from
inside of the building,wouldn't
it have blown out .and the building fall outwards
from a specific point ??

Why DID they IMPLODE and fall ????


WTC7 was the only building to implode. The towers pretty much were exploded outwards.

In that paper Cameron's been posting of Blanchard's, he states that about 95% of the total building masses were ejected outwards. He states this to contradict the idea that they were conventional demos, but as one might pick up from reading your post, that really doesn't do anything at all for the idea that there were explosive devices in the building anyway.

How Blanchard got the figure of 95%, I couldn't tell you, and he doesn't cite any sources either. I don't think anyone is ever going to have an accurate figure on exactly how much of the masses left the footprints now that it's been cleaned up, because we don't have enough information from photos and videos. But, from official reports and satellite scans, going by major debris area, and the amount of debris left in the footprints, his figure of 95% is may be a little exaggerated, and in the upper range of about how much mass was ejected. Jim Hoffman's put it at around 80-90% and that's probably a more conservative figure.

But most of the mass was nonetheless sent right out of those two buildings:








posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by CameronFox
No need to e-mail anyone. Protec did the mechanical pull of WTC6.


No they didn't. Here is an e-mail to me from Stacy Loizeaux from Controlled Demolition, Inc.


This structure was demolished by, we think, a company named NACERIMA. We understand they used a combination of a crane with a heavy steel slab to shear out column connections by dropping this slab next to columns and with demolition attachments like grapples and shears mounted on large hydraulic excavators. We weren’t involved, but I think this was the technique used.

Regards,
======================
Stacey S. Loizeaux
The Loizeaux Group, LLC
Controlled Demolition, Inc.
2737 Merryman's Mill Road
Phoenix, Maryland 21131 USA
+1-410-667-6610
+1-410-667-6624 fax


I stand corrected. Protec was hired by the companies that did the demo and clean up at ground zero. There were several companies that worked the clean up. Here is the list. If any other company claims that they have worked ground zero, they were either hired by one of the following or not being honest:

Tully Construction
D.H. Griffin Wrecking
Mazzocchi Wrecking
Yannuzzi Demolition
Gateway Demolition
Manafort Brothers

www.implosionworld.com... (page 2 on the PDF)



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox

I stand corrected. Protec was hired by the companies that did the demo and clean up at ground zero. There were several companies that worked the clean up. Here is the list. If any other company claims that they have worked ground zero, they were either hired by one of the following or not being honest:

Tully Construction
D.H. Griffin Wrecking
Mazzocchi Wrecking
Yannuzzi Demolition
Gateway Demolition
Manafort Brothers

www.implosionworld.com... (page 2 on the PDF)


I have e-mailed the following not only about pulling the builidngs but about the molten steel in the basements reported by some of the demo and wrecking crews.

Controlled Demolition Inc.
Tully Construction
Mazzocchi Wrecking

And a few others.

Here is anther note about WTC 7.
archive.mail-list.com...

Morgan Reynolds, former chief economist for the Department of Labor
during President George W. Bush's first term, says the official
story about the collapse of the Twin Towers is 'bogus' and that it
is more likely that a controlled demolition destroyed them and
adjacent Building No. 7."

WND quotes Reynolds as stating further, "Only professional
demolition appears to account for the full range of facts associated
with the collapse of the three buildings."





[edit on 9-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join