|
What did Larry
Silverstein mean by "pull it"?
Does this
statement constitute Silverstein’s admission that WTC 7 was brought down by
controlled demolition? The U.S.
Government and Silverstein Properties insist that it does not, but does their
alternative explanation make any sense?
In one of its
websites, the Department of State has posted the official response from
Silverstein Properties:
“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.”
“Later in the
day, the Fire Commander ordered his firefighters out of the building and at 5:20
p.m. the building collapsed. No
lives were lost at
Seven
World
Trade
Center
on September 11, 2001.”
Here is that
website: http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Sep/16-241966.html
The
insurmountable problem with this explanation of Silverstein’s statement is
that there were no firefighters inside WTC 7.
Dr. Shyam Sunder, of the National Institutes of Standards and Technology
(NIST), which investigated the collapse of WTC 7, is quoted in Popular Mechanics
(9/11: Debunking the Myths, March,
2005) as saying: “There
was no firefighting in WTC 7”. The
FEMA report on the collapses, from May, 2002, also says about the WTC 7
collapse: “no manual firefighting
operations were taken by FDNY”. And
an article by James Glanz in the New York Times on November 29, 2001 says about
WTC 7: “By 11:30 a.m., the fire
commander in charge of that area, Assistant Chief Frank Fellini, ordered
firefighters away from it for safety reasons.”
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/wtc7/archive/nytimes_112901.html
(Note in this
article the next to the last paragraph regarding the unexplained evaporation of
steel members. Molten steel was also
found under the twin towers, a fact that cannot be explained by the official
fire-collapse story but is explained by the use of high-energy demolition
explosives, such as thermite. Before
they could be studied, the steel remains of the buildings were immediately –
and illegally -- removed from the site, which was after all a crime scene no
matter what else you believe, over the loud objections of Fire Engineering
magazine and the New York Times, among many others, and access to the steel was
unusually restricted in the short time before it was shipped off to Asia to be
melted down, forever preventing a thorough investigation.)
Some defenders of
the official 9/11 story say that the term “pull it” is not demolition lingo for
“bring it down by controlled demolition”. However,
the same PBS video in which Silverstein makes his admission, contains the
following exchange:
(unidentified
construction worker): “Hello?
Oh, we’re getting ready to pull building six.”
Luis Mendes, NYC Dept of Design and Construction:
“We had to be very careful how we demolished building six.
We were worried about the building six coming down and then damaging the
slurry walls, so we wanted that particular building to fall within a certain
area”.
If you wish to
watch this segment, it is also at minute 5:00 in the following Alex Jones film:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2005/180305groundzero.htm
So what did Larry
Silverstein mean when he stated: “I
said, ‘You know, we’ve had such terrible loss of life, may be the smartest
thing to do is, is pull it. And they
made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse.”
He could not have meant that they should “pull” the firefighters from
the building because there weren’t any firefighters in the building, at least
according to FEMA, NIST, and Frank Fellini, the Assistant Chief responsible for
WTC 7 at that time. And if he meant
“pull the firefighters” then why did he say “pull it”, with no reference
to anything other than the building? The
argument that “pull” is not used to mean “demolish” a building is belied
by the other footage in the PBS documentary.
And consider the timing: …“they
made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse.”
Could it really be possible that some (nonexistent) fire brigade was
removed from the building and just at that moment (“then”) the building
collapsed? Is there really any
doubt here about what Silverstein meant?
Isn't the only
reasonable conclusion that Larry Silverstein’s statement is an admission
that WTC 7 was brought down by a controlled demolition, meaning that the
official version of what happened to WTC 7 is false, and casting serious doubt
on the official story that terrorists of a foreign origin destroyed the twin
towers, as well as on the rest of the official account of 9/11?
Note that this admission is a statement against Silverstein’s own
interests (putting him at odds with the official version of events and
potentially jeopardizing his enormous insurance claims.)
Such statements are given great weight as a matter of law
|
