• 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 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Not good enough. Show evidence of a cavern. You saying the rubble pile was too small is meaningless. Show how you determined the rubble pile was too small.
 
fokdatblogspot.jpg
 
Last edited:
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...


:notm
 
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...


what part of this -

b7debris.jpg


makes it seem like shape chrarges cut the foundation and a giant vacuum sucked the entire building underground?
 
Voodoosix said:
what part of this -

[qimg]http://www.debunking911.com/b7debris.jpg[/qimg]

makes it seem like shape chrarges cut the foundation and a giant vacuum sucked the entire building underground?
Click to expand...

Oh, and show your work. "It looks suspicious to me" isn't good enough. The quality of your suspicions has been judged repeatedly and found pathetically wanting.
 
It wasn't pulled, since it never fell. It molecularly dissolved in mid-air.

Stop making us real truth seekers look like crazy conspiracy theorists with your religious free-fallism, my religion is better than yours.

No-plane truth/no-collapse truth is the only truth that is supported by all the scientific evidence. PRAISE THE LORD!
 
Starving for Truth said:
It wasn't pulled, since it never fell. It molecularly dissolved in mid-air.

Stop making us real truth seekers look like crazy conspiracy theorists with your religious free-fallism, my religion is better than yours.

No-plane truth/no-collapse truth is the only truth that is supported by all the scientific evidence. PRAISE THE LORD!
Click to expand...

And he finally takes off his mask!
 
Anders Lindman said:
Pulled here means, in addition to controlled demolition, that the building was actually pulled towards the ground at a speed greater than free fall.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm why? Disregarding your magic, invisible, massively powerful, vacuum sucking building contraption; having the building visibly dropping faster than gravitational freefall would make the ebil PTB plotters a little bit on the inept side d'ya think? Might raise a few eyebrows, like - how this occurred?

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...

Please can you give us your detailed breakdown on this, I say the seismic recordings indicate that small pixies placed 1,742 pillows under the falling rubble. And my claim is about 100 times more likely than yours:D
 
Anders Lindman said:
Ok, Silverstein said that they made the decision. I remembered it incorrectly. :o

Larry Silverstein - Pull It (PBS Version) -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq-0JIR38V0

He did say "let's pull it" though.
Click to expand...

After 911, he was talking about the firemen. The fire support was pulled. Simple comprehension, lost in your delusional fantasy, of lies, and nonsense. You should be so proud.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Ok, Silverstein said that they made the decision. I remembered it incorrectly. :o

Larry Silverstein - Pull It (PBS Version) -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq-0JIR38V0

He did say "let's pull it" though.
Click to expand...

You keep putting things in quotes but that isnt a direct quote either, maybe you should stop doing that.

"pull it"... ie. the firefighting/rescue operation. Since we can see firefighters really to use the word "pull" over and over again to refer to operations in this way, the FDNY rep he was on the phone to probably used the phrase and he is just repeating it in this interview.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

What about the rest of my post? I made more than than just one point, thanks.
 
Last edited:
Just got to stop you and check credentials folks, this will only take a minute:

Is anyone here unaware that an Anders Lindman thread is for entertainment purposes only?

...

OK. Good.

Carry on and thank you for your patience.
 
From Firehouse Magazine (April 2002) Deputy Chief Peter Hayden Division1 - 33 years FDNY interview, re: Silverstein pull it comment (September 2002)
http://www.firehouse.com/article/105...-hayden?page=2

"... but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?

Hayden: No, not right away, and that’s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn’t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started PULLING the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to PULL guys back because we were concerned for their safety.

Firehouse: Chief Nigro said they made a collapse zone and wanted everybody away from number 7— did you have to get all of those people out?

Hayden: Yeah, we had to PULL everybody back. It was very difficult. We had to be very forceful in getting the guys out. They didn’t want to come out. There were guys going into areas that I wasn’t even really comfortable with, because of the possibility of secondary collapses. We didn’t know how stable any of this area was. We PULLED everybody back probably by 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon. We said, this building is going to come down, get back. It came down about 5 o’clock or so, but we had everybody backed away by then. At that point in time, it seemed like a somewhat smaller event, but under any normal circumstances, that’s a major event, a 47-story building collapsing. It seemed like a firecracker after the other ones came down, but I mean that’s a big building, and when it came down, it was quite an event. But having gone through the other two, it didn’t seem so bad. But that’s what we were concerned about. We had said to the guys, we lost as many as 300 guys. We didn’t want to lose any more people that day.
Click to expand...

Emphasis added, case closed.

Next.
 
Anders Lindman said:
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.
Click to expand...

I didn't ask you to speculate about something else, I asked for proof that an underground cavern exists. Of any size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom