Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 10:19 am Post subject: Fox News: was Silverstein's 'Pull' about CD?
This is priceless!
Jeffrey Scott Shapiro in Fox News Ventura bashing piece, writes
Quote:
Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.
A controlled demolition would have minimized the damage caused by the building’s imminent collapse and potentially save lives. Many law enforcement personnel, firefighters and other journalists were aware of this possible option. There was no secret. There was no conspiracy.
So there we have it. Fox News says it was Controlled Demolition after all. Shame he never read any of those NIST reports
(Well actually the report is ambiguous - but supports the Larry "Pull it" statement did mean CD and the only reason it couldn't be CD is the lack of sound)
Last edited by scienceplease 2 on Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:46 pm; edited 2 times in total
Joined: 30 Nov 2006 Posts: 575 Location: the eyevolution
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:52 pm Post subject:
The best bit for me is....
Quote:
While I was talking with a fellow reporter and several NYPD officers, Building 7 suddenly collapsed, and before it hit the ground, not a single sound emanated from the tower area.
While I was talking with a fellow reporter and several NYPD officers, Building 7 suddenly collapsed, and before it hit the ground, not a single sound emanated from the tower area.
The whole article is full of unintentional humour. And the comments section is also equally bonkers: Many anti-Ventura despite the logical inconsistancies! The truthers writing in and thanking Shapiro for confirming what we've been saying all along: WTC7 was brought down by Controlled Demolition!
The number of arguments I've had with people (sheeple) about CD!
The quote that I think is funny is:
"I remember watching all 47 stories of Building 7 suddenly and silently crumble before my eyes."
"Crumble" - when does steel crumble. And his definition of lack of explosives equals lack of sound. So how did the building collapse if there was not explosives inside?
Last edited by scienceplease 2 on Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:29 pm; edited 1 time in total
"I remember watching all 47 stories of Building 7 suddenly and silently crumble before my eyes."
Hey, maybe the DEW theory is worth another look after this eyewitness statement. It's bound to end up as part of the "evidence".
There would be a hole in the top of WTC7 (as per WTC6) if that was the case!
But doesn't this rather put a "hole" into every debunking site, every apologist for Larry, Mike Rudin's Conspiracy Documentaries, not to mention Shyam (Sham-I-am) Sunder's pointless press conferences?
Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 2568 Location: One breath from Glory
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 10:00 pm Post subject:
Maybe Larry also had words with his insurance company about WTC1 and 2.
If it was a CD as suggested Larry tried to authorise then boy they wired it up quick.
It is surprising thet the insurance company hasnt queried the collapse I would have thought their loss adjustors might have got onto the case at the merest whiff of suspicious play. _________________ JO911B.
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in high places " Eph.6 v 12
Please get your title right. The Fox News reporter does NOT say that WTC7 fell as a result of controlled demolition. He denies this by claiming (or should I say "lying") that he heard no sound of explosives. His article is proposing that the building fell because it was damaged, not because it was deliberately brought down.
This hit piece against Ventura is a stupid attempt to discredit his credibility. The reporter misses the point: if, indeed, it WAS true that Silverstein phoned the insurance company to get permission to "pull" WTC7, this implies that there was the capability to bring down a 47-floor building in a few hours without the days it takes normally to wire a building prior to its controlled demolition. The only possible explanation was that WTC7 was PRE-WIRED. Which means that WTC1 and WTC2 could have been pre-wired, too.
Please get your title right. The Fox News reporter does NOT say that WTC7 fell as a result of controlled demolition. He denies this by claiming (or should I say "lying") that he heard no sound of explosives. His article is proposing that the building fell because it was damaged, not because it was deliberately brought down.
I agree. I was laughing too much to really analyse what Shapiro was attempting to communicate. I hope you approve the new title.
Micpsi wrote:
This hit piece against Ventura is a stupid attempt to discredit his credibility. The reporter misses the point: if, indeed, it WAS true that Silverstein phoned the insurance company to get permission to "pull" WTC7, this implies that there was the capability to bring down a 47-floor building in a few hours without the days it takes normally to wire a building prior to its controlled demolition. The only possible explanation was that WTC7 was PRE-WIRED. Which means that WTC1 and WTC2 could have been pre-wired, too.
The point that Silverstein's "Pull It" comment really did imply CD also means that the thousands of hours trying to redefine what Larry was attempting to say has been blown.
Silverstien knew it was Controlled Demolition and was attempting to take credit for saving more firemen's lives. The Dis-info corp went into overdrive to redefine Larry's words. And now Shapiro has reconfirmed that Larry really did mean CD with the Pull It comment, knew that it was CD. We now have all the debunking websites and the BBC having to eat their words.
We want to return to 9/11 in this article as a follow to an article posted on Saturday, which attracted a great deal of feedback, and some pushback as well. The Bell examined a posting by Jeffrey Scott Shapiro for Fox News. In the process of rebutting recent accusations about 9/11 in a new book by Jesse Ventura, he made the rather startling claim that "Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building [WTC-7] - since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall."
We pointed out, along with many others in the blogosphere, that this was a surprising assertion since it can take weeks to wire a building for demolition. And we wrote, "Thus, the blogosphere speculated, either the building was already wired or Larry Silverstein was thinking about wiring it in the future."
However, from the context of the statement, it seems fairly obvious that Silverstein is speaking of demolishing building 7 in a fairly immediate context. This is an important issue because Silverstein has always denied any intention of wiring the building and had explained a way a previous comment of his about "pulling" (demolishing) it.
Mendik: Larry's competitor for the WTC site... "suddenly taken ill" and died.
Quote:
The Real Estate weekly in March1997
"In one of the most interesting transactions this year, developer/owner Bernard Mendik has agreed to swap his city real estate portfolio to become part of the Vornado Realty Trust. The transaction is valued at $654 million in a combination of cash, stock and debt,'
Mendik was at the time very close to forming his own REIT when Michael D. Fascitelli the former investment banker from Goldman Sachs who had been lured to Vornado Realty , convinced Mendik to join forces with Vornado. Mendik became Vornado's co-chairman. But later resigned in October 1998 to "'look after his personal investments''. Mendik was quoted as saying he was "'stifled'' by corporate bureaucracy, but he still remained a major stockholder in Vornado after his resignation. Vornado Realty just happens to be the very same company which was Silverstein's competitor and beat Silverstein in the initial bid to the port authority for the WTC.
Mendik, through his great success and power in the city, become a very close friend to Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. So much of a trusted friend, that Mendik was hand-picked by Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani to head a business group that provides sanitation, security and other services around Grand Central Terminal. But rifts were caused between the men when Mendik had his own ideas about how to do things and made changes to the board of directors, much to the utter outrage of Giuliani. At the time, Mendik was quoted as saying '' the new group would be free of political interference''
There is no doubt that by the year 2000 Bernard Mendik, former best friend, founding business partner and brother-in-law of Silverstein was now not only a equal major player like Silverstein, but a powerful voice in the property world, in his tenth year as Chairman of the Real Estate Board of New York and certainly Silverstein's toughest competitor.
On February the 15th 2001 Vornado's bid for the WTC, outbid Silverstein Properties $3.2billion bid by over 50million dollars. It has been said that at some point between the end of March and mid April 2001 Vornado "'suddenly changed their minds'' and "'suddenly pulled out'' There have been various reasons given for this, but there is nothing to verify either version.
On April the 26th 2001 Larry Silverstein put in his final bid for the WTC, only four weeks later Bernard Mendik was dead! On July the 24th 2001 Silverstein's offer which was 50 million dollars less than Vornado's was formally accepted and closed.
Bernard Mendik, major shareholder of Vornado Realty died on the 28th May 2001 after being taken "'suddenly'' ill. Only weeks after Vornado "'suddenly pulled out'' after the winning bid that beat Silverstein for the WTC. The official verdict was "'heart attack'' Although heart attack is often un unpredicted health emergency, many of his friends find this hard to believe, as Mendik was as far as they could tell ''a very fit and health conscious man'' in fact, Mendik had even played his regular game of tennis the very day of his death. He had also had regular checkups by the best doctors that money could buy. It was later said that the heart attack was the result of "'a blood disorder''. He had just turned 72.
Not a tweat out of BBC's Mike Rudin despite the fact fellow journalist, Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, has contradicted one of the main facets of his "WTC7 The Last Mystery" BBC TV entertainment show that Larry really didn't mean what he clearly said.
So doesn't this mean that the WAC guys in New York were right as per
"The group also criticizes us for not including one sentence from an interview with the owner Larry Silverstein. Apologies now because this gets very complicated. However, some people think hidden in this is a vital clue that can unravel the biggest conspiracy in modern times."
The theory is that the owner Larry Silverstein is meant to have implicated himself in a conspiracy to destroy the buildings he owned and leased at the World Trade Center. And what exactly did he say that supposedly gave it all away?
He said "pull it" which some people interpret as an order to demolish the building."
Which er... is EXACTLY what Shapiro says it does mean. Shapiro says EVERYBODY knew this. And that there is no Conspiracy. (R-i-g-h-t). So WAC Guys were right about calling Rudin Eurotrash? (See the opening line of that blog referenced above?)
So there it is: a Conspiracy of Silence and Dis-Information surrounding 9/11 and Questions can't be asked.
There is no Legal Due Process? There is not One Legally Admissible Fact to support the 9/11 Official Story. And the BBC knows it.
Last edited by scienceplease 2 on Sat May 01, 2010 1:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
I don't have the resources to continue an ongoing investigation into who had prior knowledge of the (9/11) attacks - but I am sure someone out there does. Many things have happened since I broke my first story. On Nov. 9, 2001, my sources informed me that the same boy who predicted the attacks told school officials there would be a plane crash on Nov. 12. I decided to inform an FBI agent I knew who told me that, without specific information, there was little they could do.
Once again, the boy's prophecy came true. Three minutes after American Airlines Flight 587 took off from JFK International Airport to the Dominican Republic, its tail snapped off and both engines fell from its wings, dooming the plane to crash in Belle Harbor, located in the Rockaway section of Queens. None of the 260 people aboard survived. To date, authorities suspect the crash was an accident. I'm not so sure.
So has anybody connected the dots between 9/11, the anthrax attacks and AA587? I must admit to have completely forgotten about AA587. I wonder who was onboard!? Shoestring, this looks looks more like your territory.
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 You can attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
