Originally posted by behindthescenes
Update on this.

I will be conducting an official interview with the source this Thursday, mainly about his experience working with Silverstein on the 9/11 lawsuits, but we'll be getting into WTC7.

I will post my findings here before I do the article, and hopefully will also have that documentation, so we can settle this.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

I would greatly appreciate your clearing this up, because I went back and reread your OP and it sounds a LOT like whoever you were talking to was actually referring to one of the OTHER heavily damaged buildings that was demolished because it sustained too much damage (I.E. WTC 6) and you're transposing it into being WTC 7 all on your own.

I invite you to prove me wrong.

Originally posted by behindthescenes

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

I would greatly appreciate your clearing this up, because I went back and reread your OP and it sounds a LOT like whoever you were talking to was actually referring to one of the OTHER heavily damaged buildings that was demolished because it sustained too much damage (I.E. WTC 6) and you're transposing it into being WTC 7 all on your own.

I invite you to prove me wrong.

Actually, I was thinking the same thing, Dave. Now, in my defense, he did insist on WTC7. But I will hold out that maybe he misspoke in some confusion. To me, the documents will settle this whole thing.

Honestly, I hope I am mistaken, because if WTC7 was in fact demolished, my whole world and everything I believe to be right, wrong, truth, justice will be upside down. I really don't need an existential crisis right now.

Originally posted by lordnightstalker
I honestly think they were all demolished

I think that's what the big lie is, they don't want to admit these buildings contain explosives, can't just let them come down sideways, it would take out half of Manhattan, to me it's just logic, if I was in charge i'd rig them too in case of the what if, what else can you do? If you ask me it would be damned irresponsible not to have them rigged for an emergency, what can you do let them topple and then guys walking around as far away as central park take bricks to the head at 60 mph as they shoot across the city?

Originally posted by ignant
My dad's Jewish and it took a few months after 9/11..

to realize what it really meant that he was told by his Jewish Capital Markets/Securities boss/firm to take the day off along with other members of the board... all Jewish

and the saddest part, theres nothing knowing that fact can do or change for all the lives lost, anyway

Originally posted by behindthescenes

Wait. Seriously? You think a consortium of Jewish business leaders knew this was coming?

Originally posted by behindthescenes
Basically, yes, WTC7 was purposely pulled according to my sources, because the damage was too great and it was listing to one side anyway, risking it collapsing in an uncontrolled fashion.

Page 39/130
Other than initiating the fires in WTC 7, the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7. The building withstood debris impact damage that resulted in seven exterior columns being severed and subsequently withstood fires involving typical office combustibles on several floors for almost seven hours...Page 39/130
Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed from fires having the same characteristics as those experienced on September 11, 2001....

Originally posted by behindthescenes
Alright, I'll have an update to my interview for you all later tonight.

Basically, yes, WTC7 was purposely pulled according to my sources, because the damage was too great and it was listing to one side anyway, risking it collapsing in an uncontrolled fashion.

I will hopefully be able to provide an insurance doc that will support this as well. And when I have some time, I'll go through my interview with you all.