View Single Post
  #6  
Old March 16th 06, 04:27 AM posted to rec.travel.air,alt.disasters.aviation,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.military
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default If WTC 7 came down from fire and debris ..

In article ,
on Thu, 16 Mar 2006 01:03:53 GMT,
TRUTH attempted to say .....

" wrote in
oups.com:

TRUTH wrote:
then why did the leaseholder say....


"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander,
telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain
the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe
the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to
pull and we watched the building collapse


Because he had decide to abandon any attempt to preserve the
building and was willing to pull any efforts to do so.



"Pull" is an industry term that means professionally demolish, as is
confirmed by this clip from the same PBS documentary:


How is that a professional term in the fire fighting industry ?

Because that is who said it, a firefighter, not a demo expert.



http://www.911blogger.com/files/video/wtc7_pbs.WMV

WTC 7, a 47 story steel framed building built in 1987, collapsed
completely, near freefall speed.


That's how they tend to collapse.



When taken down by pre-positioned explosives.


Back to this silliness again.
Do you trust pre positioned explosives to go off as planned when there is a
rather large raging fire in the structure ?

--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.