Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
WTC Demolition Conspiracy II
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 29, 30, 31, 32  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - The War on Terror
View previous topic :: View next topic  

After all of our discussions, do you now think that 9/11 was the work of:
Al Qaeda
38%
 38%  [ 25 ]
The US security services
6%
 6%  [ 4 ]
Al Qaeda, US security knew but totally screwed up
27%
 27%  [ 18 ]
Al Qaeda, US security knew and let it happen
23%
 23%  [ 15 ]
Al Qaeda and US Security fully cooperated
4%
 4%  [ 3 ]
Total Votes : 65

Author Message
ted_bloody_maulOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 23 May 2003
Total posts: 4877
Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 15-02-2010 18:29    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bigfoot73 wrote:
Me too !

Quote:
fire fighters could not fight the fires in Tower 7, because they didn't have enough water and focused on saving lives.


Presumably everyone is familiar with Larry Silverstein's oft-YouTubed 'pull it' remark, interpreted by conspiracists as referring to controlled demolition and by sceptics as meaning the firefighting operation.
What construction can be placed on that remark now that it seems there was no firefighting operation? Saving lives probably means evacuating the occupants, which wouldn't have taken long and isn't going to be stopped on anybody's order. Silverstein was very vague about what the fire chief actually said to him.
Hmmmm.........


Hmmm indeed.

The construction I would place on it is that an operation by firefighters was 'pulled'. It seems fairly obvious and it requires a fair degree of hair-splitting to confuse the comment.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Bigfoot73Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 19 May 2009
Total posts: 1106
Location: Leeds
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 15-02-2010 21:17    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's my point- there was no operation by firefighters. They weren't trying to put the fire out, they had run out of water. All the occupants would have been evacuated - what was there to "pull"?
Back to top
View user's profile 
ted_bloody_maulOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 23 May 2003
Total posts: 4877
Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 15-02-2010 22:09    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bigfoot73 wrote:
That's my point- there was no operation by firefighters. They weren't trying to put the fire out, they had run out of water. All the occupants would have been evacuated - what was there to "pull"?


There was an operation. They couldn't fight the fires because there was no water but that doesn't mean that there was no initial attempt to do so or any other kind of operation (firefighters do more than just fight fires you know).

I must say I find the persistence of absolute faith in Silverstein's clumsy mendacity to be one of the most mystifying things about 9/11. Is there really anybody out there who interprets his remarks so fluidly who wasn't convinced of a conspiracy before hearing them? I can't help feel it does more harm to the credibility of the conspiracy theories than it does good.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Bigfoot73Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 19 May 2009
Total posts: 1106
Location: Leeds
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 16-02-2010 00:55    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
(firefighters do more than just fight fires you know).


Yes, but they weren't doing much of it in WTC7 on 9.11. A bulge was seen to be developing on the corner, creaking sounds were heard coming from it. I think it can be inferred from this that the firefighters were outside.
So Silverstein was just giving his assent to the cessation of some positive attempt to save the building? There doesn't seem to have been anything of that magnitude going on. Why would the fire chief need to consult him about keeping his crews standing around in the street?
Crucial to this is what the fire chief has said about this, but I don't know if he has ever gone on record with anything. Building 7 wasn't considered by the Commission.
At some risk of becoming a sceptic, perhaps it went like this: the chief rings Silverstein and tells him there's nothing he can do, and Larry resignedly acquiesces in this. Later, in front of the camera, he writes himself a more pro-active role in history and makes out that he was more concerned for the welfare of the fire crews than his bricks and mortar, so he urges the chief to withdraw them.
Or then again perhaps he knew the building was coming down due to controlled demolition and was keen to cover his tracks.

I can appreciate the sceptics' rebuttal to the claim that he was referring to giving an order to demolish, but I think he was being dishonest. Hence my first post of the day - the revelation that there was no firefighting operation in WTC7 when the sceptic interpretation depends on it just thickens the plot.
Back to top
View user's profile 
wembley9Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 14 May 2009
Total posts: 243
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 16-02-2010 13:40    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bigfoot73 wrote:
So Silverstein was just giving his assent to the cessation of some positive attempt to save the building? There doesn't seem to have been anything of that magnitude going on. Why would the fire chief need to consult him about keeping his crews standing around in the street?


This does seem a bit too obvious for words...but there is a risk of death when you leave people in an area like that with fires and buildings collapsing. And if you decide they can do any good, you pull them. That's exactly what I'd expect.

Bigfoot73 wrote:

I think it can be inferred from this that the firefighters were outside.


You can infer that some firefighters were outside, but that doesn't mean that none were inside.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Bigfoot73Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 19 May 2009
Total posts: 1106
Location: Leeds
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 16-02-2010 14:21    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
You can infer that some firefighters were outside, but that doesn't mean that none were inside.


So if there were any inside why isn't it their observations that are referred to in the Wiki entry? You might expect some account of what they were doing and when they withdrew. There isn't much they could have been doing apart from monitoring the spread of the fires and the developing damage to the fabric of the building, so where is their testimony?

Quote:
there is a risk of death when you leave people in an area like that with fires and buildings collapsing.


How close would they have been anyway given that the towers had collapsed unexpectedly and they weren't trying to put the fires out ?
There was nothing going on that the cessation of would have required Silverstein's assent.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Twin_StarOffline
Profane, Harsh, Unharmonious
Joined: 05 May 2009
Total posts: 205
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 16-02-2010 15:22    Post subject: Reply with quote

I haven't really got much to add to this debate im afraid, but i saw "102 minutes that changed America" in September 2009 on C4 and there is a few minutes footage where a camera crew is inside WTC7. It's almost totally deserted, with dust and smoke filling the atrium and corridors, alarms going off and generally looking pretty beat up. I do remember there was one other guy on screen, a secret service buildings maintenance dude who was checking certain sections had been totally evacuated before leaving himself.

102MTCA doesnt appear to be on youtube or similar so i guess you'll just have to take my word for it.

What i can help you with, however, is this site:

http://www.archive.org/details/sept_11_tv_archive

Which has archived all the TV spots for September 11 & 12 from ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, Fox and NBC. I only watched a few minutes of the BBC footage (by 11AM EST the BBC pundits had already fingered OBL, and shown footage of a plane - not hologram or missile - flying into the second tower). If anyone is really interested enough, you can trawl through that lot to find the original NYFD chief talking about "pulling it", you could also maybe find the bit where a BBC reporter comments on the second tower being hit before it was actually - all of which point to some vast conspiracy im sure...
Back to top
View user's profile 
Bigfoot73Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 19 May 2009
Total posts: 1106
Location: Leeds
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 16-02-2010 15:40    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks TwinStar, that's just what we need. Secret service guy? Hmmm. No firefighters though. I will check it out, any clues as to where the fire chief video is greatly appreciated.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Twin_StarOffline
Profane, Harsh, Unharmonious
Joined: 05 May 2009
Total posts: 205
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 17-02-2010 14:17    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bigfoot73 wrote:
...any clues as to where the fire chief video is greatly appreciated.


Like i said in my initial post, im not really familiar with the facts of this particular element of 9/11. From what ive just read - briefly - since, it seems a Silverstein guy, with vested interests yadda yadda, tells the fire chief to "pull it" ie WTC7 sometime between 11am (when their were definitely firefighters in WTC7 and 5ish pm (WTC7collapsed 5.20 give or take). there's no suggestion i can find that any of this was caught on TV. I suppose the only thing you could do is look through the rolling news from about 11AM 9/11 to see if there is any mention about the firefighting operation at WTC7. It's laborious, hence my use of the word trawl. i really wouldnt know where to start Sad GL to you tho!
Back to top
View user's profile 
Dr_Baltar
PostPosted: 17-02-2010 15:54    Post subject: Reply with quote

rynner2 wrote:
9/11 third tower mystery 'solved'
By Mike Rudin
BBC, Conspiracy Files

The final mystery of 9/11 will soon be solved, according to US experts investigating the collapse of the third tower at the World Trade Center...etc...



Perhaps I've missed something here, but why are we discussing a report from nearly 2 years ago as though it's news?
Back to top
View user's profile 
Dr_Baltar
PostPosted: 17-02-2010 16:44    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bigfoot73 wrote:
Hence my first post of the day - the revelation that there was no firefighting operation in WTC7 when the sceptic interpretation depends on it just thickens the plot.


You could try reading what it says at the link Ted posted.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Bigfoot73Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 19 May 2009
Total posts: 1106
Location: Leeds
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 17-02-2010 20:36    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you mean the Wikipedia article then I have read it. That much should be clear from my subsequent posts.
Back to top
View user's profile 
ted_bloody_maulOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 23 May 2003
Total posts: 4877
Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 17-02-2010 21:40    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bigfoot73 wrote:
If you mean the Wikipedia article then I have read it. That much should be clear from my subsequent posts.


So how do you explain the statements of the firefighter cited at reference number 29?

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110313.PDF
Back to top
View user's profile 
Timble2Offline
Imaginary person
Joined: 09 Feb 2003
Total posts: 7132
Location: Practically in Narnia
Age: 59
Gender: Female
PostPosted: 17-02-2010 21:56    Post subject: Reply with quote

You've obviously not bothered to read anything else since there were fire crews around the building until mid-afternoon before the decision was made to evacuate and the building collapsed around 17:20.

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_pulled.html

Quote:
Silverstein's spokesperson, Mr. McQuillan, later clarified:

"In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building."

He could be lying, right? But here is the corroborating evidence...

"They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down." - Richard Banaciski
Back to top
View user's profile 
Bigfoot73Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 19 May 2009
Total posts: 1106
Location: Leeds
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 17-02-2010 22:00    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can't find anything in that pdf that says when they left WTC7. They went in, and withdrew not long after. Nothing in that testimony contradicts my claim that the firefighting operation was over when Silverstein was claiming it was him that called it off. There's nothing for it, we're going to have to trawl through Twinstar's archive link !
Back to top
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - The War on Terror All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 29, 30, 31, 32  Next
Page 30 of 32

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group