Based on your responses to the questions I've raised it's safe to say you've never studied the inconsistencies of the official story. Because you aren't aware of any, and there's plenty, you just chose to ignore them, and re-frame your argument to avoid looking stupid.
No I didn't, you're a liar.
I'm sure Dan had nothing to due with the conspiracy, I only focus on the ones who benefit the most. And that would be the military industrial complex and oil companies.
You have no source to validate that claim.
Those were civilian rescue workers, not FDNY. And there was no one to rescue since everyone was evacuated one hour after the first plane hit Tower 1.
It would have. But there is nothing strange about someone missing a word like that when being interviewed.Well, I see you (and he can see you through me then). I have seen this 'pull' comment before but I have never paid it much heed. I think it'd have made more sense if he had said 'to pull back'.
No. Loading up a building with explosives takes time. They couldn't have made the decision to demolish it on the day while the building was burning and had been damaged by part of a skyscraper falling on it. It would have had to have been loaded up beforehand and somehow go completely unnoticed.I mean, seriously, demolition people do pull buildings and it would seem appropriate there; as in, the building can't be saved, so let's pull it so it doesn't cause damage to the surrounding buildings.
In the WTC7 lies document there are links for many firefighter testimonies where they used "pull" to describe backing away from WTC7.I personally think he may have known the building was pulled and made a gaffe; as in, revealed more then he himself wanted to by mistake.
It may seem that way at first. After a closer analysis, this collection of evidence starts to fall apart.Anyway, I'm willing to believe that he may have simply been trying to say 'to pull back'. As far as I'm concerned, there's so much evidence that the building was pulled,
Ofcourse he wasn't he didn't plant the bombs in building 7. This was a high level false flag operation. Nor did he use the term pull it.
If it's the end why do waste your time regurgitating it? Also, Sliverstein said pull the building, he said nothing about firefiighters since the building was evacuated 7 hours before it collapsed, and the waterline was severed 6 hours prior. And Silverstein said that he knew the building was empty when he made that comment. Also, according the NIST report and FEMA no manual firefighting was taking place inside of WTC. So when he said pull the building, it was the biggest Freudian slip of the century.
Actually it is, the WTC was designed to survive the impact of a 707 and hurricane wind loads, since a 707 is lighter and has a higher cruise speed then a 757, which means it would produce more kinetic energy on impact then a 757. So when you say, 530 MPH, Jetliner, crash, doesn't mean the laws of physics should be ignored, which you continue to do.
Read the report and find out for yourself. This proves that you're to biased to even process any differing conclusions then your own subjective ones.
It was planted. Along with the Koran he took with him on the flight, and the Koran he left in his hotel room, along with the Koran atta left at the bar he attended the night before. Also, the Government said they identified the hijackers through DNA evidence. Can you tell me where the Government attained the original D.N.A to match it against the ones that found on 911? You can't can you, all of the smoking gun evidence is either classified or non existent. Your theory requires blind faith.
People who believe everything the Government says should be avoided. Especially plants.
You're a liar, you didn't link shit from the New York Times, you have no source that quote and calling you out out.
What a moronic response.
They were not in the building, you have no source that confirms that. Once again you're a liar.
"At that time, other firefighters started
showing up, Deputy Battalion Chief Paul Ferran of the
41 Battalion, and James Savastano of the First Division
assigned to the Second Battalion showed up and we
attempted to search and extinguish, at the time which
was small pockets of fire in 7 World Trade Center. We
were unaware of the damage in the front of 7, because
we were entering from the northeast entrance. We
weren't aware of the magnitude of the damage in the
front of the building.
We made searches. We attempted to put some
of the fire out, but we had a pressure problem. I
forget the name of the Deputy. Some Deputy arrived at
the scene and thought that the building was too
dangerous to continue with operations, so we evacuated
number 7 World Trade Center. At that time, some of my
members went with another officer, I don't remember who
it was, to try and search the collapse of -- I guess
the number one tower on Vesey Street."
They weren't fighting the fire from outside the building. They attempted to but there was pressure coming from the hoses because the waterline was severed from the WTC 1 & 2 collapse.
The fact still remains, no manual firefighting was taking place in WTC7 as the NIST and FEMA reports indicate. Until you can source your quote that allegedly refutes their data, you're pushing unsubstantiated claims.
You have no source for that information. You're a liar. You're depending on a WIKI article with a dead link. You fail, and it's quite embarrassing that I'm even paying any attention to such a poor researcher such as yourself.
All you're doing is name calling and labeling.
You're intellectually inept, and incapable of weighing the evidence objectively and without prejudice.
Sock Puppy: And you know that they were sure they got them all? What's your argument then: that no rescue workers were dispatched? Which would prove what in any case?
WTC 7 had zero casualties. Like a said, you're poor researcher.
Still waiting for you source your claim. You're about to be humiliated bub.
Out of all of that hot hair, you didn't list or source one fact to back up any of your arguments.
Yes he did. Dan Nigro has stated in a quote that I have pasted to you multiple times that it was his decision to create an evacuation zone and pull everyone out of that zone without the consent of Larry Silverstein or any other person.
Who exactly are these 'plants'?
Another interesting tidbit of information...The main structure collapses totally in under 7 seconds, only about a second slower than it would take a brick dropped from the building's roof to reach the ground in a vacuum.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/speed.html
Your dishonesty is exposed once again.
lol, My dishonesty? Did you even watch the video you posted? It did not take 13 seconds Im afraid...
And we went over this already, attack the evidence not the person...
You may reveal your actual motivations otherwise!
For clarification, the penthouse begins to fall at the 5 second mark of the video, the rest of the building begins to fall at the 12 second mark, the building disappears from view at 18 seconds. So 13 seconds not counting whatever happened out of view of the camera.
After the penthouse sinks, the building apparently remains standing (despite what is happening inside) for several seconds, before it begins to rapidly fall.
You don't get to be treated with respect when you are a conniving conspiracy nut.
Yes he did. Dan Nigro has stated in a quote that I have pasted to you multiple times that it was his decision to create an evacuation zone and pull everyone out of that zone without the consent of Larry Silverstein or any other person.
You keep going back to saying nobody was inside the building which is true
even though I pasted you firefighter testimony that they were heading inside the building before they got pulled. But that is not the point. The point is that there were people outside who were potentially in harms way should the building collapse. Get it through your thick skull and stop developing this farfetched hollywood movie based on the word "pull".
When the tower was designed, there was no notion of anyone deliberately flying planes at 550mph at 1,000 feet, so that's of course not what they were talking about. Perhaps they were thinking of a more realistic scenario of a plane low in fuel traveling at approach speed lost in fog hitting the WTC which would be a completely different scenario.
I don't have to read it, I've already read it be debunked, and the fact that he didn't submit it for scientific peer review means it's not worth anyones time.
But it was peer reviewed you say? By whom? The "scholars for 9/11 truth"? You'll have to do better than that.
Nothing but conjecture. A plane crashed into a building and lots of peoples belongings on the plane were ejected to the street below
Who exactly are these 'plants'?
Just to put a bullet in this dying animal, here are just some of the sources of firefighters and first responders using the term pull relating to themselves being evacuated from the area. And we are to believe the when Larry said "pull", it could only mean "demolition"
Originally Posted by KennyJC
For clarification, the penthouse begins to fall at the 5 second mark of the video, the rest of the building begins to fall at the 12 second mark, the building disappears from view at 18 seconds. So 13 seconds not counting whatever happened out of view of the camera.
That weren't around building 7 in the first place.
There was no one to rescue, nor was there any water available.
For you to insinuate that the firefighters were just standing around building 7 is bullshit.
That's not what Silverstein was referring to. He said it, if he said them, you would have leg to stand on, since he didn't, you don't.
People who exercise extreme prejudice and hostility to any information that contradicts their story.
He never said pull it, this your desperate attempt to save face after being humiliated by being exposed as a disinformation agent. You said pull it wasn't a demolition term, now that it has been confirmed that it is, you're attempting to change the argument.
I know it's true, but you originally stated that they were.
That weren't around building 7 in the first place. The firefighters were to busy trying to dig up their comrades who resided in towers 1 & 2. There was no one to rescue, nor was there any water available. For you to insinuate that the firefighters were just standing around building 7 is bullshit. That's not what Silverstein was referring to. He said it, if he said them, you would have leg to stand on, since he didn't, you don't.
You're distorting the truth once again. Here's the WTC designer regarding Jetliners hitting the WTC.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=614_1208638371
That's why it's so painfully obvious after losing so many points in this debate that you haven't considered any other facts but what the Goverment has fed you.
People who exercise extreme prejudice and hostility to any information that contradicts the official story. ^^^
Now I've wasted my time reading all of those PDF's, not one reference to the term "pull it" was found. Like I said, you can't find one, not one single phrase where the firefighters used the phrase "Pull it" to evacuate a building.