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.

 

So who the heck ever said "Pull it" was slang for controlled demolitions?

page: 56
17
<< 53  54  55    57  58  59 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by RockLobster

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by RockLobster
 


How about you first answer the reply I made to one for your posts some pages back? I am not here to amuse you. If you don't like what I write, don't read it.
edit on 7-4-2012 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)


How about you let me know what you`re referring to , i`ve read the posts since i was last in this thread ..... and none of yours are directed at me.


PLB has a habit of making this exact same post, he's made it to me twice, and like you there was no question asked. He won't ask it again, or link to it, but simply keep claiming you purposely failed to answer his oh so important question, or address his oh so important point.

OSers are not here to debate, but to create doubt in what anyone who questions the OS says.


edit on 4/7/2012 by ANOK because: This space for rent, U2U for rates...




posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


I do not beleive the firemen took it down , and i have never claimed to , so your post actually made no sense at all considering the fact that in my previous post i wrote ----- > -" Delusional is beleiving that a buisiness man was in total control of a life / death situation involving firemen. "-



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


Ah there is Anok, afraid of physics and has too much of an interesting real life to read 2 pages back. And then lying about me not telling him where to read my question. Nice of you to join in.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by RockLobster
 


Yeah, that is kind of the reason why he said that they and not himself made the decision to pull. We really need a face palm smiley on this forum.
edit on 7-4-2012 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by RockLobster
 


Yeah, that is kind of the reason why he said that they and not himself made the decision to pull. We really need a face palm smiley on this forum.
edit on 7-4-2012 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)


Most threads would be full of them in response to your childish posts.

Are you going to answer my question from the last page ?

And your ignorance is once again preventing you from even thinking like an adult .....

he said - > "I remember getting a call from the, er, 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."



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by RockLobster
 


I know your main arguments are personal insults addressed to me, but you really should follow a course in reading comprehension instead.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by RockLobster
 


After reading his quote lets break it down:

"I remember getting a call from a fire dept commander"

= So someone called from the NYFD to him.

"telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire"

= This is in reference to WTC7 and the out of control fires, little to no water available, and structural integrity failing. The fire dept commander told him they are not sure if they can save WTC7.

"and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life"

= In reference to the WTC Towers collapsing and killing hundreds of fire fighters, police, and thousands of civilians.

"maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.'"

= Larry gives the opinion that in light of the loss of life, the smartest thing to do would be to stop the fire fighting operations and let the fires rage on, and no longer risk fire personnel to save the doomed building. "It" in this case refers to the fire fighting operation at WTC7.

"and they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

= The fire commanders made the decision to pull out from WTC7 and from around the Pile, as corroborated by many fire fighters who said they got pulled from the area about 2-3 hours before collapse. After the order to pull back, the building collapsed, and they watched it fall, knowing it was doomed.

There we go. Basic reading comprehension is an ability that is severely lacking in many truthers. Sad really. So upon reading the above, one can infer that A) Larry was on the phone with the fire commander talking about the deteriorating condition of WTC7. B) Larry comments that since so many have died, the best thing to do would be to stop the fire fighting operations, and save lives, in case this building goes down too. C) The fire dept commanders made the decision to pull the operations in and around WTC7 (if any) and set up a collapse zone. This was done on the observations of severe instability of the building, which was exhibiting all the signs of impending collapse, be it a local collapse or global collapse. Studying fire manuals, burning structure collapses are a serious threat, and ALL have the same check list to look out for, for ALL buildings, be it a one story house, a 10,000sq ft warehouse, or a high rise. A transit was placed to measure the creep of the building as it was slowly failing internally, but creating bulges and cracks in the structure. Also, sounds heard internally indicated structural instability. I would recommend you truthers to actually read through fire training books, manuals, and fire publications online that go into the checklist for signs of impending structural failure. It does not change for wood, steel, brick, or stone. Then look through the actual reports of the condition of WTC7 prior to collapse from various fire personnel and go through the checklist to see how they came to the decision to abandon it. Similar reports were made in the WTC Towers before the fell too.


edit on 4/7/2012 by GenRadek because: spell



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by RockLobster
 


I know your main arguments are personal insults addressed to me, but you really should follow a course in reading comprehension instead.


My main arguments are personal insults addressed to you ? Love yourself much ?

You may think that i am trying to insult you , but i am not , however , if you are insulted by my posts then that is your problem and not mine.

How about answering this question , since you seem to be refusing to answer my last........

Why do you think N.Y.F.D Luitenant David Restuccio said these words ..
---> “We had heard reports that the building was unstable, and that it would eventually need to come down on its own, or it would be taken down. I would imagine it came down on its own.” " or it would be taken down "



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


" This was done on the observations of severe instability of the building, which was exhibiting all the signs of impending collapse, be it a local collapse or global collapse "

Any evidence of this severe structural damage ? Any footage of these "signs of impending collapse" ? I have still not seen any evidence of this extreme damage you OSers keep harping on about , the structural integrity of tower 7 was not compromised , if it was , then please , provide me with some hard evidence of that.

Also ...... you`re not looking at that quote hard enough. Why would the fire dept listen to Larry Silverstein in this situation ?

(Businessman = compulsive liar)



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-

Originally posted by Demigodly
reply to post by -PLB-
 


.


Those with no internet access are blessed with not being polluted with this kind of crap.



So why you here then?
Why do you insult people, and try to make out as if they are less intelligent than you?
Are you a bigot?

Another thing, you think Alex Jones is in it for the money? Give me a break! Do you know how much it cost's to run a full time radio station? Maybe that's why he tries to sell a few DVD's, which by the way, he encourages people to burn and give away for free. He also uploads all his documentaries to Youtube.

And yeah too right he is crazy mad, The truth does that to people!



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by RockLobster
 


I agree!
Where is the "devastating damage"? From the images I have seen there is none.
But the damage I have seen looks suspicious.









posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by RockLobster
reply to post by GenRadek
 


" This was done on the observations of severe instability of the building, which was exhibiting all the signs of impending collapse, be it a local collapse or global collapse "

Any evidence of this severe structural damage ? Any footage of these "signs of impending collapse" ? I have still not seen any evidence of this extreme damage you OSers keep harping on about , the structural integrity of tower 7 was not compromised , if it was , then please , provide me with some hard evidence of that.

Also ...... you`re not looking at that quote hard enough. Why would the fire dept listen to Larry Silverstein in this situation ?

(Businessman = compulsive liar)


My friend, this information comes direct from the firefighters themselves. THEY were there and saw all the signs. I refuse to repost again all of the firefighter accounts that directly noted it. Just because there was no video or pictures taken, it does not mean it didnt happen. Why should they have? For you to dismiss? I doubt they had firefighters walking around video taping everything, as if they had nothing better to do. In fact, they had plenty to do, rather than worrying about video taping things for fun. For starters, have you seen this video:



He was there.

Use the ATS Search and look up "firefighter accounts WTC7 damage" and google it too. Start there. There was plenty of evidence for firefighters to decide WTC7 was in trouble.


EDIT to add:

In regards to Larry, what is wrong with giving your personal opinion to someone that is in charge of trying to save your building? Nice try with the "businessman = liar" crap. That bull wont fly with me.
edit on 4/7/2012 by GenRadek because: added more



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


The fireman in that video ......... is he qualified enough to have an opinion ? it seems engineers arent , neither are pilots , infact neither are the firemen that say there was explosives.

The fireman in that video does not seem to know what day it is, never mind what structural integrity is , he is clearly just as confused as everyone else.

And that is not evidence of the damage you were trying to describe. Your arguement that firemen dont walk around recording things for fun is pretty weak too , how do you know the structural integrity of tower 7 was compromised if you have not seen any evidence of this ? and how do you expect me to beleive you if you cant show any evidence of this ?
edit on 7-4-2012 by RockLobster because: (no reason given)


EDIT : In regards to Larry , if you are faced with a life and death situation , why would you phone the owner of the building , to get permission to make your men fall back "incase it collapsed" ?

Why would the fire crews answer to Larry ? How many people were still in there ? i guess we`ll never know.

edit on 7-4-2012 by RockLobster because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by RockLobster
 


After reading his quote lets break it down:

"I remember getting a call from a fire dept commander"

= So someone called from the NYFD to him.

"telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire"

= This is in reference to WTC7 and the out of control fires, little to no water available, and structural integrity failing. The fire dept commander told him they are not sure if they can save WTC7.

"and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life"

= In reference to the WTC Towers collapsing and killing hundreds of fire fighters, police, and thousands of civilians.

"maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.'"

= Larry gives the opinion that in light of the loss of life, the smartest thing to do would be to stop the fire fighting operations and let the fires rage on, and no longer risk fire personnel to save the doomed building. "It" in this case refers to the fire fighting operation at WTC7.

"and they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

= The fire commanders made the decision to pull out from WTC7 and from around the Pile, as corroborated by many fire fighters who said they got pulled from the area about 2-3 hours before collapse. After the order to pull back, the building collapsed, and they watched it fall, knowing it was doomed.

There we go. Basic reading comprehension is an ability that is severely lacking in many truthers. Sad really. So upon reading the above, one can infer that A) Larry was on the phone with the fire commander talking about the deteriorating condition of WTC7. B) Larry comments that since so many have died, the best thing to do would be to stop the fire fighting operations, and save lives, in case this building goes down too. C) The fire dept commanders made the decision to pull the operations in and around WTC7 (if any) and set up a collapse zone. This was done on the observations of severe instability of the building, which was exhibiting all the signs of impending collapse, be it a local collapse or global collapse. Studying fire manuals, burning structure collapses are a serious threat, and ALL have the same check list to look out for, for ALL buildings, be it a one story house, a 10,000sq ft warehouse, or a high rise. A transit was placed to measure the creep of the building as it was slowly failing internally, but creating bulges and cracks in the structure. Also, sounds heard internally indicated structural instability. I would recommend you truthers to actually read through fire training books, manuals, and fire publications online that go into the checklist for signs of impending structural failure. It does not change for wood, steel, brick, or stone. Then look through the actual reports of the condition of WTC7 prior to collapse from various fire personnel and go through the checklist to see how they came to the decision to abandon it. Similar reports were made in the WTC Towers before the fell too.


edit on 4/7/2012 by GenRadek because: spell




Raging fires? lol Even the twin towers weren't raging. They were slow smoldering burns. No infernos.
Listen General, steel structured buildings don't collapse at freefall speeds due to fires. If burning long enough, they would fall apart like a candle, not fold like a cheap deck chair. It's never happened before 9/11. There were only a few scattered fires at WTC7. You fail to mention the 100's of witnesses reporting the explosions before and during all the collapses, as well.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by RockLobster
reply to post by GenRadek
 


The fireman in that video ......... is he qualified enough to have an opinion ? it seems engineers arent , neither are pilots , infact neither are the firemen that say there was explosives.

The fireman in that video does not seem to know what day it is, never mind what structural integrity is , he is clearly just as confused as everyone else.

And that is not evidence of the damage you were trying to describe. Your arguement that firemen dont walk around recording things for fun is pretty weak too , how do you know the structural integrity of tower 7 was compromised if you have not seen any evidence of this ? and how do you expect me to beleive you if you cant show any evidence of this ?
edit on 7-4-2012 by RockLobster because: (no reason given)


So if he says the building is leaning, he cannot be taken seriously since he is "not qualified"? What did I just say about doing some research into fire safety and collapse checklist? You do not need to be a engineer to figure out something is seriously wrong with a 47 story building that is leaning to one side.
But nice of you to insult a firefighter.
Real classy.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Demigodly
 



Raging fires? lol Even the twin towers weren't raging. They were slow smoldering burns. No infernos.
Listen General, steel structured buildings don't collapse at freefall speeds due to fires. If burning long enough, they would fall apart like a candle, not fold like a cheap deck chair. It's never happened before 9/11. There were only a few scattered fires at WTC7. You fail to mention the 100's of witnesses reporting the explosions before and during all the collapses, as well.


Slow burn? Seriously? No inferno?
Oh boy, what planet are you from? No raging fires at any of the WTC buildings. right.............

And you wonder why we poke fun at Truthers. When you give us such comedy gems..........


Also regarding the explosions: you have 30+ acres of offices burning with two aircraft inside, and also thing falling to the ground. You mean to tell me there arent suppose to be explosions heard? They heard explosions when that F-18 crashed into the apartment complex in Virginia yesterday. Were the bombs in there too?



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


Yeah , insult a fire fighter , like that wasnt your only reason for bringing it up
you`re taking this to a new low.

If tower 7 was leaning where is the footage ?

If tower 7 was leaning why did it fall straight down ?



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Demigodly
reply to post by stanguilles7
 


Now he's a media empire? lol
Until he has his own major media tv network, or at the least, a regular guest on one, he's small time. He doesn't get major exposure, as you'd like to think he does.


I notice you continue to drift further and further from defending your original claim that he isnt handsomely compensated for his job.

Why do you keep doing that? It's a simple question, do you or do you not think Jones makes a very good living playing his role?

Try and answer the question. Thanks



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by Demigodly
 



Raging fires? lol Even the twin towers weren't raging. They were slow smoldering burns. No infernos.
Listen General, steel structured buildings don't collapse at freefall speeds due to fires. If burning long enough, they would fall apart like a candle, not fold like a cheap deck chair. It's never happened before 9/11. There were only a few scattered fires at WTC7. You fail to mention the 100's of witnesses reporting the explosions before and during all the collapses, as well.


Slow burn? Seriously? No inferno?
Oh boy, what planet are you from? No raging fires at any of the WTC buildings. right.............

And you wonder why we poke fun at Truthers. When you give us such comedy gems..........


Also regarding the explosions: you have 30+ acres of offices burning with two aircraft inside, and also thing falling to the ground. You mean to tell me there arent suppose to be explosions heard? They heard explosions when that F-18 crashed into the apartment complex in Virginia yesterday. Were the bombs in there too?




This is an inferno
www.youtube.com...

The Windsor Tower burned for 24 hrs and never collapsed.

If I'm a 'truther' does that make you a 'falser'?



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by Demigodly
reply to post by stanguilles7
 


Now he's a media empire? lol
Until he has his own major media tv network, or at the least, a regular guest on one, he's small time. He doesn't get major exposure, as you'd like to think he does.


I notice you continue to drift further and further from defending your original claim that he isnt handsomely compensated for his job.

Why do you keep doing that? It's a simple question, do you or do you not think Jones makes a very good living playing his role?

Try and answer the question. Thanks





I fail to see how that has any relevence. It's fine if you don't agree with his views. It's fine if you dismiss him as 'crazy'. He is a man of conviction, honesty, and believes he's fighting the good fight. He's actually been offered a ton of money by various major tv/radio networks, but refused them due to conflict of interests/compromise. That speaks a lot to his charcter. His work is too important to him to sell out.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 53  54  55    57  58  59 >>

log in

join