So Larry Silverstein *did* want WTC7 demolished on 9/11. Discuss.

page: 1
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 9 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   
You may have already seen the article:


Shame On Jesse Ventura!
...
Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building [WTC7] – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.

A controlled demolition would have minimized the damage caused by the building’s imminent collapse and potentially save lives. Many law enforcement personnel, firefighters and other journalists were aware of this possible option. There was no secret. There was no conspiracy.


www.foxnews.com...



This is "very interesting" considering the years-long debate over what Larry meant when he said this:


"I remember getting a call from the 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."


whatreallyhappened.com...



For years trusters have cried, "He must have meant pull all the firefighters out of or away from the building!" even though WTC7's fires were not being fought, and trusters often cite that fact themselves.


Well now according to someone else, in much more explicit words than "pull it," Larry was apparently lobbying for a controlled demolition to take place that day. Somehow.



What is the significance of an independent person in a Fox News article verifying that Larry Silverstein in fact had an interest in demolishing the building that day? And how could you deny immediately thinking of his infamous "pull it" quote as this has been revealed?


I suppose the predictable answers from trusters would be "there is no significance," and "move along, there is nothing to see here."




posted on May, 9 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   
larry said pull it, but back tracked and said he wanted to pull the fire fighters out, but we find out later on that fire fighters were not even fighting the fire. but what did he really mean by pull it if there were NO firefighters in the building?

*cough* CD *cough*

but its well known already, but this subjects been beat to death with a an ugly stick.

Lets see how the debunkers squeeze their way through this one.

[edit on 5/9/2010 by ugie1028]



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by ugie1028
 


Forget "pull it" by itself.

"Pull it" has a new companion now from a completely different person, saying yes, Larry did want WTC7 demolished, and not only that, but lots of people knew about it!

This isn't the first time we've heard this after all, as there was civilian medic Indira Singh who was told WTC7 was going to be "brought down," NYPD officer Craig Bartmer who said he personally witnessed explosions ripping out of the lobby of WTC7 as it began "collapsing," and another EMT who said there was a 20-second radio countdown before WTC7 was demolished.



Either way,


Larry wanted WTC7 demolished that day. Deny the article itself if you want, but it's just additional confirmation to what others already know.

And so since he wanted WTC7 demolished, and people who were there already knew that, then what was that he was saying about "pull it" again?



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 06:43 PM
link   
It definitely says this:


Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.

Source Fox News Article

On the Phone eh?



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 06:43 PM
link   
How would a demolition team rig a skyscraper to be demolished in such a short time when it normally takes weeks if not months?



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Larry Silverstein is obviously a good, gentle, kindhearted individual that didn't want to see anymore people getting hurt over this horrible attack by Bin Laden and those crazy box cutter brandishing Muslim extremists, so he simply said "pull it", meaning, get everyone out of building 7 so there isn't anymore senseless lost of life. He ought to receive a Nobel Prize for the courage that he showed on that day. We need more good, courageous people like this in our world today.

Thank You Larry for your courage and strength that you showed in reaching out to help your fellow man on that horrible day in history.



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by drock905
How would a demolition team rig a skyscraper to be demolished in such a short time when it normally takes weeks if not months?


Exactly.


And since Larry Silverstein is no stranger to controlled demolition himself, being the head of a real estate development company, it makes even less sense!



Originally posted by warisover
Larry Silverstein is obviously a good, gentle, kindhearted individual that didn't want to see anymore people getting hurt over this horrible attack by Bin Laden and those crazy box cutter brandishing Muslim extremists, so he simply said "pull it", meaning, get everyone out of building 7 so there isn't anymore senseless lost of life.


Just want to make it clear to everyone that this is sarcasm.


Everybody had evacuated WTC7 early on, before both towers had even collapsed. See Barry Jennings' testimony.

[edit on 9-5-2010 by bsbray11]



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 07:03 PM
link   
When informed by the FDNY that WTC 7 was being abandoned and left
to burn Silverstein had to consider his options - unlike rest of WTC
which were owned by Port Authority WTC 7 was owned outright by
Silverstein.

So what is first thing you do after accident or fire ?

CALL THE INSURANCE COMPANY!

Have a adjuster show up to assess damage and determine course of action

One course of action is to repair the damage - as long as structural
integrity of building is intact

If too badly damaged have to demolish building and rebuild again.

Problem is here usually get into pissing contest between lawyers which can go on for years

Witness 1 Meridan Plaza in Philadelphia

Took almost 10 years to resolve



One Meridian Plaza was a 38-story high-rise office building in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States. The 492 feet (150 m) tower was designed by Vincent Kling & Associates and completed in 1972. The building was demolished in 1999 as a result of damage of a fire that began on February 23, 1991. The fire began on the 22nd floor after linseed oil soaked rags ignited a blaze that raged out of control for hours. Philadelphia firefighters fought the blaze, but struggled due to a lack of power in the skyscraper and insufficient water pressure from the building's standpipes. Three firefighters died in the Twelve alarm fire after becoming disoriented by heavy smoke. Firefighting efforts inside One Meridian Plaza eventually were abandoned due to fears the structure would collapse. The fire was only brought under control once it reached the 30th floor which was one of the few floors that had automatic sprinklers installed. Ten sprinklers held back the fire until it started burning itself out. The blaze seriously damaged the building destroying eight floors and damaged neighboring buildings.

In the years after the fire, One Meridian Plaza sat vacant and damaged right in center of Philadelphia's business district. The building was caught in ligation between the owners and the insurance company over how much the insurers would pay the owners and how repairs or demolition would proceed. Businesses near the empty high-rise closed or moved and the city sued the owners to do something with the building. After lawsuits were settled One Meridian Plaza began to be dismantled in 1998. At the time of its deconstruction in 1999, One Meridian Plaza was the third tallest destroyed building in the world.



Same thing happened to Deutsche Bank building at 130 Liberty St




The 41-story Deutsche Bank building at 130 Liberty Street, opposite the World Trade Center, was badly damaged when the center's south tower collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001, and was left highly contaminated. It has never been reoccupied. The first of many battles over its fate pitted Deutsche Bank against its insurers. With matters at an impasse, the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation bought the structure in 2004, intending to tear it down and replace it with a new tower.


Now Silverstein would have about 2 hours from time FDNY abandoned WTC 7 at around 3PM and collapse at 5:20

Tell me you demolish a 47 story building in 2 hours?



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


As has been pointed out already to you thedman, you do not call your insurance company to ask for permission to demolish your own building. Nor would an insurance company make any kind of deal on that over the phone, without sending people out to look at the property. So the whole thing the guy in the article is saying, does not make sense, and stinks of being a very poor explanation for something that obviously struck a nerve.

The whole thing around Larry Silverstein, demolition, and WTC7, stinks to high heaven. None of it makes a damned bit of sense except that WTC7 was intentionally demolished that day as it free-fall into itself, and NIST, as nimble as they are with computer fabrications, weren't able to reproduce either the acceleration or the symmetry of that collapse by their own theories.





In your whole post I notice you manage to completely avoid addressing what I point out in the OP.

I also remember you in particular for something else: at least twice I have corrected you about the aircraft impact speeds for which the Twin Towers were investigated to be stable, ie 600 mph by John Skilling's engineering firm, NOT Les Robertson's. And I provided you with the sources. And you still post blatant lies saying they were only designed for low-speed impacts. Put short it isn't even worth reading your posts because you can't retain what is shown to you anyway. You post lies.



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


It is you who are avoiding the issue

How does one demolish a 47 story building in 2 hours ?

Much less in front of numerous cameras.....

You posted that Silverstein CALLED HIS INSURERS

As I pointed out such cases often end up in years of litagation


Even if Silverstein insurers said go ahead

HOW YOU DO DEMOLISH A SKYSCRAPER IN 2 HOURS!



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


your right, just like the witnesses who heard explosions in the basement of WTc1 & 2, but by debunkers standards they are either lying or misremembered.

at least people are coming out against the OS. i am glad about that. bout ten years late, but better late then never.



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman

HOW YOU DO DEMOLISH A SKYSCRAPER IN 2 HOURS!


At last count, I think 9/11 Truthers were up to 27 different ways.



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


ok then why was he asking his insurance company for permission to CD it?

Either A.) they had a super fast team of CD specialists on standby in case scenario (SHTF) happened, and sent them in and rigged it.

Or B.) these explosives were pre-planted giving support to the inside job theory.

either way option A is impossibly by your standards because it wasnt enough time to set it up since CD takes weeks/months to plan and implement..

which brings pre-planted explosives a lot more likely which again, is against your standards.

wasn't fire that brought it down. there were lots of other beams and support that should of resisted the collapse instead of falling into its own footprint like it did without damaging the buildings near it.



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by bsbray11
 



HOW YOU DO DEMOLISH A SKYSCRAPER IN 2 HOURS!


Simple, You fly a 767 into the building 2 buildings over. You will then have a perfect free fall demolition a few hours later of the building you wanted demolished.



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by thedman

HOW YOU DO DEMOLISH A SKYSCRAPER IN 2 HOURS!


At last count, I think 9/11 Truthers were up to 27 different ways.



Okay, let's count the theories put forth by "truthers" :

1) Explosives were planted in the several weeks or months prior to 9/11.

...
That's it. It's been the explanation since day one from "truthers". The stunning irony (and stupidity) of your post is further magnified by the fact that this thread is precisely dealing with the ever-increasing number of explanations for why there was no inside conspiracy that day.

[edit on 9-5-2010 by Son of Will]



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ugie1028
 


Now you are entering the nutbar territory...

Explain how real estate magnates have teams of demolition experts
just sitting around waiting to blow up buildings

Or

Explain how you pre plant explosives in a building to demolish it just in case

Further explain how:

Such explosives do not deterioate over time becoming unstable and either
not exploding or going off at random or in a fire

Explain how such explosives are not discovered by maintenance, cleaning
construction people or others ?



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
Even if Silverstein insurers said go ahead

HOW YOU DO DEMOLISH A SKYSCRAPER IN 2 HOURS!


And my response above: "Exactly."

And my continued response, as you can see above, is that these are just lame excuses for the real situation in Manhattan that day, which we still don't completely understand, because we are still being lied to. Even you admit there is something not right about this article.



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by js331975

Originally posted by thedman
HOW YOU DO DEMOLISH A SKYSCRAPER IN 2 HOURS!


Simple, You fly a 767 into the building 2 buildings over. You will then have a perfect free fall demolition a few hours later of the building you wanted demolished.


Priceless.










Looks like your method works, too.

And what makes this all so "magical," NIST couldn't even reproduce that much symmetry, and that free-fall acceleration, with their best computer simulations of that building. As I showed above, their theoretical model doesn't even approach what actually happened to WTC7, and their report was a total failure for bringing closure to anything except myths of exploding gas tanks.




Originally posted by Son of Will

Originally posted by jthomas
At last count, I think 9/11 Truthers were up to 27 different ways.



Okay, let's count the theories put forth by "truthers" :

1) Explosives were planted in the several weeks or months prior to 9/11.

...
That's it. It's been the explanation since day one from "truthers". The stunning irony (and stupidity) of your post is further magnified by the fact that this thread is precisely dealing with the ever-increasing number of explanations for why there was no inside conspiracy that day.



Good catch. jthomas has to keep making up more baseless and unproven excuses to explain all these things, while they fit naturally in line with what "we" have been saying since day 1. So his accusations are just projections, that reflect himself, rather than others.



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


i am trying to suggest something that fits. its like a puzzle, pieces come together over time. you have to understand all angels of possibility before shoving it aside. try something, if it doesn't work, move on.

its also used in the scientific method. you should try it some time.

[edit on 5/9/2010 by ugie1028]



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 11:09 PM
link   
Here's the infowars.com commentary on the Fox article, which points out a lot of the same things this implies about what "debunkers" have been arguing for years now:


Bombshell: Silverstein Wanted To Demolish Building 7 On 9/11






Immediately after the “pull it” controversy, debunkers claimed there was no plan to conduct a controlled demolition of the building. Now the fact that officials were considering blowing up the building is established, Silverstein’s consistent denial that this took place is a huge smoking gun. How did Silverstein expect to demolish the building safely when such a process takes weeks or even months to properly set up, even without the additional chaos surrounding WTC 7 on 9/11? How could explosives have been correctly placed on such short notice inside a burning building that had already been evacuated – unless the explosives were already in place? This new revelation is astounding and it needs to be investigated immediately.



"thedman" asked how this could be set up so quickly. My response was "Exactly!" And Paul Watson's response is also 'exactly!'


The original Fox article again:


I know this because I was working as a journalist for Gannett News at Ground Zero that day, and I remember very clearly what I saw and heard.
...
Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building [WTC7] – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.

A controlled demolition would have minimized the damage caused by the building’s imminent collapse and potentially save lives. Many law enforcement personnel, firefighters and other journalists were aware of this possible option. There was no secret. There was no conspiracy.


www.foxnews.com...



Man, these people have dug themselves one hell of a hole now.





new topics
top topics
 
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum