• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Was Building 7 Pulled?

Anders Lindman

Penultimate Amazing
Anders Lindman
Joined
Sep 17, 2010
Messages
13,833
I think I have posted about this in another thread, only as a brief mentioning. This thread is meant to examine the question about whether building 7 was pulled in more detail.

Pulled here means, in addition to controlled demolition, that the building was actually pulled towards the ground at a speed greater than free fall.

The seismic recordings of building 7 falling show only small signals. This indicates that the building was pulled into a huge underground cavern.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I think I have posted about this in another thread, only as a brief mentioning. This thread is meant to examine the question about whether building 7 was pulled in more detail.

Pulled here means, in addition to controlled demolition, that the building was actually pulled towards the ground at a speed greater than free fall.

The seismic recordings of building 7 falling show only small signals. This indicates that the building was pulled into a huge underground cavern.
Click to expand...


Hahahaha...

Yeah, and just HOW in the hell would that be done?

There's very little I can say to you Anders... within the forum MA. :mad:
 
Jim_MDP said:
Hahahaha...

Yeah, and just HOW in the hell would that be done?

There's very little I can say to you Anders... within the forum MA. :mad:
Click to expand...
Saturday night delusions. I love fantasy, but this is nuts making up lies about 911.
Poor guy can't touch reality.
 
*sigh* as if this hasn't been done to death in current and prior 9/11 threads.

C'mon, Anders! How about something original?
 
the only ones who could pull this off would be jedis. they used the death star to take out wtc 1 and 2 and werent clear enough of the moon to hit 7, a team of jedis went in and cut the beams with lightsabers and then used jedi mind powers to try and push the building to china via the shortest possible distance.
 
Jim_MDP said:
Yeah, and just HOW in the hell would that be done?
Click to expand...

I can imagine a huge cylinder sucking out a vacuum underground, below the building. And with shape charges the foundation is cut loose, which together with the vacuum sucks the entire building underground, faster than free fall.

I haven't examined how much rubble building 7 produced above ground. If my theory is correct, the pile of rubble would have been small.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I think I have posted about this in another thread, only as a brief mentioning. This thread is meant to examine the question about whether building 7 was pulled in more detail.

Pulled here means, in addition to controlled demolition, that the building was actually pulled towards the ground at a speed greater than free fall.

The seismic recordings of building 7 falling show only small signals. This indicates that the building was pulled into a huge underground cavern.
Click to expand...

Nope, it's still standing!
 
Anders Lindman said:
I can imagine a huge cylinder sucking out a vacuum underground, below the building. And with shape charges the foundation is cut loose, which together with the vacuum sucks the entire building underground, faster than free fall.

I haven't examined how much rubble building 7 produced above ground. If my theory is correct, the pile of rubble would have been small.
Click to expand...

So is the problem here drugs you're on or drugs you need to be on?
 
Do you know what firefighters say when they walk out of a building? "Let's pull it." Not.
 
Also notice that if Larry Silverstein would have referred to the firefighters when using the term 'pull it', then he would have said: And THEY [the firefighter authorities] decided to pull it. What he actually said was: And WE decided to pull it. Did Larry Silverstein have the authority to be a part of the decision-making process for what to do with the firefighters? Of course not. That was something for the fire department to decide. So 'pull it' in this context means to literally pull the building below ground.
 
No Anders, because the "rescue effort" or "firefighting operation" can certainly be referred to as an It.

Why would Silverstien admit to demolishing his own building on recorded Tv, as if it were nothing, when no one else notices he has done so and using (claimed) slang terminology that does not mean "to put explosives in buildings and demolish it" anyway. Also, if Silverstien was telling the truth about demolishing his own building why was he lying about the FDNY making the decision to "pull it". Remember? He said it was THEIR decision.

What he actually said was: And WE decided to pull it
Click to expand...

That is not what he said, he said THEY decided to pull it (ie. the rescue/firefighting operation around WTC7).
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
I can imagine a huge cylinder sucking out a vacuum underground, below the building. And with shape charges the foundation is cut loose, which together with the vacuum sucks the entire building underground, faster than free fall.

I haven't examined how much rubble building 7 produced above ground. If my theory is correct, the pile of rubble would have been small.
Click to expand...

When I first read the thread title I thought:

22110572.jpg


And when I read your post:

gallery_80266_18_227338.jpg


And then I said to myself:

cbd.gif


But to you I say:

129102501669262069.jpg


And further:

6c3.jpg
 
In this video Silverstein doesn't explain the term "pull it" even though that was the question asked:

Larry Silverstein avoids 9/11 questions -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGGHPNW-CWs

And he avoided a question about the fire department commander denying that he had talked to Silverstein.

And in the video, doesn't Silverstein himself say that building 7 was already empty of all people?
 
Why do you think it's okay to turn such a serious topic into a meaningless hobby? Let's not pretend here you're actually interested in the truth here. The nicest thing I could say about your meaningless ramblings and sloppy analysis is that they are in intensely bad taste.
 
threadworm said:
Please identify the underground cavern on any pre-9/11 maps you can find.
Click to expand...

The pile of rubble from building 7 was too small without an underground cavern. Speculation: Maybe they planned it like that so that the too small piles of rubble from the WTC towers wouldn't look suspicious. In the case of the towers however the reason for the lack of debris was because the towers were to a large extent hollow. That also explains how the top of one of the towers could tilt so much during the collapse and still fall straight down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom