What did Larry Silverstein mean by "Pull It"?, page 9
Pages: <<  6    7    8    9    10    11  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 19 times


reply posted on 16-12-2008 @ 01:00 PM by Aeons
Originally posted by Griff
Originally posted by Aeons
If you had very important renters that required a certain amound of discretion, and you had a building that was already set up to be taken down quickly in an emergency


I would have no problem with this if true. The problem I would have is that we are being told something else. See my signature about how I feel about lying.


I assume that there are some things that they don't want to be known.

Layering a lot of poop on the whole thing is probably the best way to control the situation, when literally it was broadcast over the entire planet.

What happened there open up my eyes to the fact that sometimes things that are even on TV all over the World can just disappear from public view. The rolling media blackout that went from the USA, to North American and Europe was just astonishing. It never occured to me that I should be RECORDING everything I was tracking that day.

I doubt very much that most of the conspiracy stuff is true. I think most of it is intentionally planted or husbanded information.

There are kernels of truth in there, under all the poop.

The two plane manifestos that didn't jive. On 9/12 the white house said the shot a plane out of the air. I was watching very closely for the information, because I was one apparently one of the only people trying to figure out what happened to the fifth plane that was heading the white house/camp david. That one disappearing from the networks was an example of the roll out media black out.

The kernel of truth is there. The manifestos from the two planes where probably put together, because the two planes came from the same place and they were heading in the same direction. One plane went down due to the actions of the passengers. The other plane got shot down.

I'm one of the few people who seem to have been tracking Plane Five that just disappeared in the tracking on 9/11.

It is probably very easy to just feed the frenzy and then crush the opposition for errors of logic. Help others create strawmen and then knock them down. All the while plowing the real bits of information under. Its brillant. Really.


reply posted on 18-12-2008 @ 11:56 AM by Griff
Originally posted by rush969
The fire chief has to make HIS CASE, that he took that decision ON HIS OWN and it was his responsability.


Here ya go. In Nigro's own words.

Regarding WTC 7: The long-awaited US Government NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) report on the collapse of WTC 7 is due to be published at the end of this year (although it has been delayed already a few times [ adding fuel to the conspiracy theorists fires!]). That report should explain the cause and mechanics of the collapse in great detail. Early on the afternoon of September 11th 2001, following the collapse of WTC 1 & 2, I feared a collapse of WTC 7 (as did many on my staff).
The reasons are as follows:

1 - Although prior to that day high-rise structures had never collapsed, The collapse of WTC 1 & 2 showed that certain high-rise structures subjected to damage from impact and from fire will collapse.
2. The collapse of WTC 1 damaged portions of the lower floors of WTC 7.
3. WTC 7, we knew, was built on a small number of large columns providing an open Atrium on the lower levels.
4. numerous fires on many floors of WTC 7 burned without sufficient water supply to attack them.

For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit.

Regards, Dan Nigro
Chief of Department FDNY (retired)


911guide.googlepages.com...

This isn't something I just pulled out my ass you know.


reply posted on 18-12-2008 @ 04:29 PM by rush969
These are the exact words of Mr. Silverstein:

"I remember getting a call from the Fire Department commander, telling me 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 just pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse."


1.- Mr. S. is saying he GOT A CALL FROM the Fire Dep. Commander. Could this be a call on the commander´s behalf, by somebody else? I believe it could.
2.- Could it be a call just to inform him a decision has been made to pull the team of fire fighters away? And he is just sharing his thoughts on the issue, perhaps trying to feel he participated in that decision?
3.- He clearly states that THEY made that decision, not him. So this is corresponds to chief Nigro´s comment that he alone decided to pull the men out.

Also, another issue being overlooked by the OP is from the statement made by chief Nigro which is self explanatory:
2. The collapse of WTC 1 damaged portions of the lower floors of WTC 7.
3. WTC 7, we knew, was built on a small number of large columns providing an open Atrium on the lower levels.
4. numerous fires on many floors of WTC 7 burned without sufficient water supply to attack them.

For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.
Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit.
Regards, Dan Nigro
Chief of Department FDNY (retired)

He says he made the decision without consulting anyone. THAT DOESN´T MEAN HE DIDN´T LET ANYBODY KNOW OF HIS DECISION. He probably informed many others of this, Silverstein among them, or had a subordinate do exactly that!!




reply posted on 18-12-2008 @ 07:03 PM by guinnessford
what first comes to mind when you are referring to a building, and you hear someone say "pull it"? here is what ive gathered and in no means want to start an argument. the two towers were hit by aircraft, and 10,000 gallons of jet fuel each. guessing that the fuel oil tanks in wtc7 arent as big as this, ill assume that it wasnt the fuel oil that exploded and brought it down. jet fuel, diesel fuel, kerosene, and heating oil are all pretty much the same. and thats what most people misunderstand about this. emergency preparedness and management offices for nyc and the atf, irs, and many other spook agencies chose the buildng to have offices in, so ill assume it was of fairly safe design and construction. any and all pictures ive seen do not look anything like a fully involved fire that ive seen in my life. and have left wood structures standing. giving the fact that all the pictures ive seen of the other surrounding buildings with as much, if not more damage were burning, contained fuel oil tanks (im assuming this) for heat and generators, and the fact that it fell "straight" down 5 minutes after i was told on live tv that it HAD ALREADY fell, the term and usage IN MY MIND, when he said"pull the building" meant demolish it. im joe the mechanic. off the street. no engineering degree, no physics degree, just someone with alot of common sense and a good idea about how metal and other building materials react. who cares when it was wired, if it was wired. what he meant was what he said.

[edit on 18-12-2008 by guinnessford]


reply posted on 21-12-2008 @ 01:04 AM by ipsedixit
reply to post by ashamedamerican

I've been thinking a little about this "pull it" business. My focus in this post is the psychology of Larry Silverstein, his inflexibility, what one might see as an obsessive compulsive response to an unforeseen emergency.

At first I thought "Oh, this is dumb stupid Larry putting his foot in his mouth just because he is so dumb and stupid, but I realized that if Larry had just kept his mouth shut, the perps might not have had such a big WTC7 problem."

The fact is that WTC7 was damaged, though not enough to cause it's classic controlled demo collapse. In the fog of the average American brain, the damage would have been sufficient to keep the ones you can fool, fooled.

So, why did Larry say what he said. Here's my explanation. It's subtle.

I think that rather than going off script, as most people assumed he was doing, Larry was trying to stay on script.

If you think of 9/11 as a stage performance, somebody missed a line. Somebody failed to feed him his line and like a smart performer, Larry ad-libbed, to fill the gap and keep the script on track.

Flt. 93 failed to arrive in New York and failed to crash into WTC7.

In the script that Larry was committed to, a reason for WTC7's collapse was to have been supplied by the arrival of Flt. 93 at the address of WTC7. When it didn't arrive, he stayed on script, he ad-libbed a reason, because the script called for a reason and Larry's anal retentive personality couldn't resist the compulsion to supply one, even against common sense and his best interests.

A smarter performer than Larry would have kept quiet, counting on fog of war and incidental damage to the building, to keep the public off the track.

Larry had probably seen the damage to the building, knew (as a building guy) that no building guy would accept that amount of damage as sufficient reason for a collapse and decided the "FDNY approved decision to pull it" would do as a situationally appropriate ad-lib.

So yes, Larry was dumb but "smart dumb" as people sometimes are, not "dumb dumb" as I originally thought he was.
Pages: <<  6    7    8    9    10    11  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 13 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 6 days ago with 12 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 14 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous hacks CIA
  Breaking Alternative News, Posted 13 hours ago, 107 replies
Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 9 hours ago, 88 replies
Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 7 hours ago, 61 replies
Free will
  Philosophy and Metaphysics, Posted 11 hours ago, 48 replies