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.
Originally posted by HattoriHanzou
There are many videos that show the cutting charges actually blowing out the sides of the buildings an instant BEFORE the collapse starts.
NOVA: How do you do that?
SL: Well, you just pull it away, you peel it off. If you have room in the opposite direction, you just let the building sort of melt down in that direction and it will pull itself completely away from the building. It can be done.
Originally posted by Myendica
Dave, end of discussion. heres the "who the heck" said it..
Interview with Stacey Loizeaux, Controlled Demolition Inc.
and I quote
NOVA: How do you do that?
SL: Well, you just pull it away, you peel it off. If you have room in the opposite direction, you just let the building sort of melt down in that direction and it will pull itself completely away from the building. It can be done.
Notice the few "pull it" that are in there. read that interview. I encourage everyone to. explains alot.
Enjoyedit on 21-3-2012 by Myendica because: (no reason given)
Depending on the height of the structure, we'll work on a couple of different floors—usually anywhere from two to six. The taller the building, the higher up we work. We only really need to work on the first two floors, because—you can make the building come down that way
Originally posted by Six Sigma
Yes, one makes VERY large booms just prior to collapse.
Originally posted by Only1King
Just a thought, but did anyone mention the missing gold from towers 1 and 2?
Originally posted by litterbaux
The more I watch video's and read this very thread the more I ask myself, who are the real people?
There is a lot of mudslinging in this thread about the use of the term "pull it". The truthers believe this was Larry's definition of a "controlled demolition". The OS'ers are saying the term didn't exist and or does not mean "controlled demolition".
Ok now that we got that out of the way.
Explain to me why he said, "we decided". Is he some sort of God or something? How does one decide a building will fall? Debris fell on a lot of buildings that morning. Why did they decide to pull down that one and not other buildings?
We decided to pull it. It wasn't physics or fires, it was US!
You guys can complain that there isn't enough evidence to go either way but if you open your eyes, ears and minds the obvious answers are right in front of your faces. You can choose to believe it or not, doesn't matter to me.
Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by AGWskeptic
this thread is about who in the cd industry ever used "pull it" as slang for bring down the building. I proved that a prominant person in the industry, uses "pull it" as slang for cd. Dont side step with this.. Oh she (yeah, she, not he.. Stacey is female) says they would only use on first two floors. Well continue.. Or maybe go back a few paragraphs.. They use charges higher up when they wish to "pull" a building so it causes very minimal surrounding damage. I proved Dave wrong.. Dont turn this thread into "my side lost lemme deflect..".
Originally posted by AGWskeptic
Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Originally posted by Alfie1
Originally posted by 4hero
Erm, sorry to disappoint you dear chap, but you are completely wrong. Maybe a few people just regurgitate what they read, but personally, I used my eyes and ears to work it out. Explosions and falling into own footprint in the way all 3 buildings did is enough to figure out it was a controlled demolition. One does not need other people to present their views for me to come to that conclusion. I'm sure you have watched the videos, it's blatantly obvious.
NIST employed more PhD's than you can shake a stick at on their investigations into the collapses of WTC 1,2 &7.
What a waste of time and money when they could have come straight to you for your assessment based on watching youtube clips.
Dude, stop being so naive. Water does not run uphill. Buildings do not collapse spontaneously at freefall velocity (this has been proven). They don't collapse because of a few random office fires. You do not need a PhD to know that these things are indisputable.
A few random office fires?
Did you miss the part about planes loaded with 100,000 pounds of jet fuel crashing into them at 500 mph?
Maybe you do need a PHD.
Originally posted by longjohnbritches
This Dave guy here asks for information about 911. He has a signature that would lead anybody with half a brain to assertain that he already knows who destroyed the building in question.
Then it looks he wants to brainwash and deceive folks that really want to talk about the subject.
Welcome me to MUDDY WATERVILLE.
LATER
Originally posted by Myendica
oh quit fooling yourself. It is building. Get over it. and by "get over it" I really mean, "get over people"edit on 21-3-2012 by Myendica because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by HattoriHanzou
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Originally posted by HattoriHanzou
the widely accepted theory that Larry Silverstein mean to destroy the building
See this is the kind of thing I mean. It is by no means "widely accepted" that Larry Silverstein meant this. Only someone who gets their information from a microscopically tiny spectrum of media could believe such a thing.
But that's just it. Most people out there have no knowledge of who Larry Silverstein even is, let alone that he stood to profit massively from insurance claims if his buildings went down, nor that they were in danger of being condemned because of asbestos.
There are no serious researchers of 9/11 who have not been labeled as conspiracy nuts by the mainstream media and other ridiculous mouthpieces that are in the public eye, so despite the mounds of good solid information regarding the context and obvious meaning of "pull it" people like you are still trotting out ridiculous theories and non-sequiters about what the REAL meaning of an otherwise strikingly obvious phrase could be. Get over it.
Here's the full quote: "And I remember getting a call from the, um, fire department commander tellin' me that they were not sure that they would be able to contain the fire. I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is, is PULL it. Uhhhhh, and they made that decision to pull, and then we watched the building collapse."
I'm not sure if you have actually seen Mr. Silverstein saying all this, but within the context of the situation there is only one way in which any reasonable person could interpret these comments. He is clearly admitting that he and the fire department gave the order to pull the building down using controlled demolition. Looking at the collapse of all three buildings on that day, it is quite clear that they were taken out using controlled demolition. If you don't believe that this is what really happened, you need to carefully review the facts. However, I believe that, after reviewing the OP's post history briefly, that he and a few supporters of his are interested in trying to stifle debate and ridicule people, with rather ridiculous assertions, rather than anything else.edit on 21-3-2012 by HattoriHanzou because: (no reason given)edit on 21-3-2012 by HattoriHanzou because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by HattoriHanzou
reply to post by AGWskeptic
There are many videos that show the cutting charges actually blowing out the sides of the buildings an instant BEFORE the collapse starts.
I'm sure you know this already, though. It's OK - you go on and "believe" whatever you wish.