# Did Larry Silverstein know about 9/11? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 5, 2015, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340 "2015-07-05T20:17:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![bombthefeds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/77aa72/32.png) [@bombthefeds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bombthefeds)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/61 "2015-07-06T05:13:50Z")
> [@Mr.Miskatonic](#): > > This is your claim that things with are WTC7 are strange (albeit only to you). > > But you fail to grasp that the situation with WTC was pretty much unique. > > 1. Steel framed structure > 2. large amounts of burning debris falling on top of the building from collapsing WTC 1 & 2 > 3. Failure of the sprinkler system due to water lines getting damaged by the aforementioned buildings > 4. Zero firefighting efforts whatsover due to loss of firefighter’s lives and rescue efforts around collapsed WTC 1 & 2. > > Until you get a skyscraper fire with similar conditions, you cannot compare it to random skyscraper fires and say ‘Well that one didn’t collapse!!’’ > > Its not up to use to find a case where the 4 above conditions happened. You have to explain why any skyscraper should be considered a match for what happened to WTC7. First of all, even the NIST states that debris from tower 1 wasn’t the cause of the collapse and that collapse was due to fire fueled by “office combustibles” I agree there is no exact scenario, I was asked to present every high-rise fire of a skyscraper ever, and that’s exactly what I am doing case by case. I believe that given the duration and intensity of some of these other fires which suffered minimal structural damage, or when they did suffer structure damage it was a slow progressive deterioration of the structure not a free-fall collapse, that one can see the minimal effect fire has on the structural integrity of skyscrapers except in the rare scenario of a WTC 1 and 2. One thing that I’d like to address here which is the difference between WTC 1 and 2 and WTC 7. WTC 1 and 2 did collapse for the reasons the official story gives. Many will say “jet fuel can’t melt steel” however they fail to realize that steel at temperatures as low as 800 degrees loses most of its strength. There is no evidence that WTC 7 ever reached those temperatures, it is also apparent from the photos that the fire was not burning uncontrollably, it was fairly tame, and also WTC 7 was not nearly as large building as WTC 1 or 2 both of which fell in near free-fall collapse due to the weight of the top portions crushing the lower portions. WTC 7 could have collapsed due to fire, that would be one thing. It is the way it collapsed into itself, all at once, and in free-fall demolition fashion that makes the official story so unbelievable. Again, if someone can find a similar scenario of a steel building collapsing in demolition style due to fire alone, our work will be done in a jiffy. Of course, no such example exists. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/62 "2015-07-06T05:22:30Z")
> [@bombthefeds](#): > > Many will say “jet fuel can’t melt steel” however they fail to realize that steel at temperatures as low as 800 degrees loses most of its strength. > > There is no evidence that WTC 7 burning at those temperatures 1. 800 degrees on what scale? 2. See [here](http://aneta.org/911experiments_com/articles/Jia-FengChen/BehavorHighStrengthStructuralSteelElevatedTemperatures.pdf), for example - high strength steel loses more than half of its strength at temps as low as 600-700 Celsius. 3. Look up at what temperature wood/charcoal or paper can burn. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/63 "2015-07-06T05:23:23Z")
So you’re saying that Larry Silverstein got word somehow (perhaps from the White House) that there was going to be a terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. And his response was to rig up another office building he owned so that he would be ready to blow it up during the terrorist attack. Did Silverstein do this himself the weekend before the attack? Or did he hire a crew of workmen to install the explosives? Why didn’t any of these workmen step forward after the attack and point the finger at Silverstein? Where did Silverstein get the explosives? Why didn’t anyone think it was suspicious that he bought all those explosives right before one of his buildings blew up and mention it to the investigators? After the fire, which you say is obviously physically impossible, why didn’t any of the world’s professional fire investigators point out this impossibility? ---
**Author:** ![bombthefeds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/77aa72/32.png) [@bombthefeds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bombthefeds)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/64 "2015-07-06T05:28:20Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > So you’re saying that Larry Silverstein got word somehow (perhaps from the White House) that there was going to be a terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. And his response was to rig up another office building he owned so that he would be ready to blow it up during the terrorist attack. > > Did Silverstein do this himself the weekend before the attack? Or did he hire a crew of workmen to install the explosives? Why didn’t any of these workmen step forward after the attack and point the finger at Silverstein? Where did Silverstein get the explosives? Why didn’t anyone think it was suspicious that he bought all those explosives right before one of his buildings blew up and mention it to the investigators? > > After the fire, which you say is obviously physically impossible, why didn’t any of the world’s professional fire investigators point out this impossibility? Well, actually that isn’t what is being said, that was proposed as one possible scenario to explain the collapse of WTC 7. The 5 reasons Silverstein’s story is suspicious are clearly listed in the first post on this thread. The most coincidental of all them is the fact that he happened to schedule a dermatologist appointment that morning when he would normally being having breakfast on top of WTC 1 [by his own account](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ScGZCqEyGM). This was only one of 2 days he did not have breakfast there from when he had obtained ownership of the property on July 24th, 2001. If anyone has alternative theories they are more than welcome, but what is going to be debated here tooth and nail is the fact that the collapse of WTC 7 is not at all suspicious because it is extremely suspicious and unprecedented and this was even admitted in the NIST report. ---
**Author:** ![bombthefeds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/77aa72/32.png) [@bombthefeds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bombthefeds)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/65 "2015-07-06T05:30:58Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > 1. 800 degrees on what scale? Celsius This report is all anyone needs as evidence that WTC 1 and 2 did collapse due to the reasons cited in the official story. [http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom/0112/eagar/eagar-0112.html](http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom/0112/eagar/eagar-0112.html) Unfortunately, such a clear report does not exist for WTC 7. I wonder why? ---
**Author:** ![dasmoocher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dbc845/32.png) [@dasmoocher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dasmoocher)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/66 "2015-07-06T05:39:37Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Did Nancy Reagan know? Sure, why not? Her astrologer told her. > [@bombthefeds](#): > > The 5 reasons Silverstein’s story is suspicious are clearly listed in the first post on this thread. The most coincidental of all them is the fact that he happened to schedule a dermatologist appointment that morning when he would normally being having breakfast on top of WTC 1 [by his own account](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ScGZCqEyGM). > > This was only one of 2 days he did not have breakfast there from when he had obtained ownership of the property on July 24th, 2001. > > If anyone has alternative theories they are more than welcome, \ Silverstein had a rash? ---
**Author:** ![bombthefeds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/77aa72/32.png) [@bombthefeds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bombthefeds)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/67 "2015-07-06T05:42:50Z")
> [@dasmoocher](#): > > Silverstein had a rash? That’s his alibi, I would like to believe it and I absolutely will once someone can give adequate explanation for the collapse of WTC 7 due to fire fueled by “office combustibles” In case anyone forgot the collapse that looked like [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&=&=&v=bWorDrTC0Qg) ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/68 "2015-07-06T05:47:40Z")
> [@bombthefeds](#): > > That’s his alibi, I would like to believe it and I absolutely will once someone can give adequate explanation for the collapse of WTC 7 due to fire fueled by “office combustibles” Let me get this straight: You will believe he had a rash, not if someone comes up with medical evidence that he had a rash, but only if someone instead comes up with some sort of explanation of the collapse of WTC 7 that satisfies your curiosity? ---
**Author:** ![bombthefeds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/77aa72/32.png) [@bombthefeds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bombthefeds)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/69 "2015-07-06T05:57:30Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Let me get this straight: You will believe he had a rash, not if someone comes up with medical evidence that he had a rash, but only if someone instead comes up with some sort of explanation of the collapse of WTC 7 that satisfies your curiosity? Whether he had a rash or not isn’t the point. He’s an old man, I’m sure he has many rashes and other viable reasons to visit the doctor at any given moment. It’s whether he knew not to be in his normal position on top of WTC 1 that morning. Given the fact the only buildings that collapsed that day were his buildings and the fact he tried to collect double on his insurance policy, and the still unresolved demolition style collapse of WTC 7, I’m think there’s a little to much suspicion to just take his word that he HAPPENED to schedule a doctor’s appointment that morning. If the WTC 7 collapse can be explained that would eliminate most of the suspicion. Of course it cannot and it never will be explained without either use of magic or use of demolition and I’m pretty sure the people on this board aren’t about to jump on board the idea of magic. ---
**Author:** ![bombthefeds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/77aa72/32.png) [@bombthefeds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bombthefeds)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/70 "2015-07-06T06:01:09Z")
Also, for completeness sake here, many CT’s believe WTC 7 was destroyed to hide information. I’m not about to jump full sail on that bandwagon, but here is a [list of the tenants](http://www.wtc7.net/background.html) of the building on 9/11. [ul] [li]Salomon Smith Barney [/li][li]IRS Regional Council [/li][li]U.S. Secret Service [/li][li]C.I.A. [/li][li]American Express Bank International [/li][li]Standard Chartered Bank [/li][li]Provident Financial Management [/li][li]ITT Hartford Insurance Group [/li][li]First State Management Group, Inc [/li][li]Federal Home Loan Bank [/li][li]NAIC Securities [/li][li]Securities & Exchange Commission [/li][li]Mayor’s Office of Emergency Mgmt[/li][/ul] It wasn’t just 42 stories of Build-A-Bear workshops to say the least ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/71 "2015-07-06T06:03:15Z")
Let me ask you this, what do you base your expertise on how buildings burn on? Do you have professional credits in the field? Or are you just reading articles on the internet and figuring that makes you an expert on the subject? Or are you taking the word of somebody else who is claiming to be an expert? If your argument comes down to the claim that buildings don’t burn like that, you’ve got to establish you know what you’re talking about. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/72 "2015-07-06T06:08:13Z")
> [@bombthefeds](#): > > …and the still unresolved demolition style collapse of WTC 7… Yeahhh…about that. I don’t think you’ll find any real demolition experts that’ll back you up on that claim. ---
**Author:** ![bombthefeds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/77aa72/32.png) [@bombthefeds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bombthefeds)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/73 "2015-07-06T06:09:05Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Let me ask you this, what do you base your expertise on how buildings burn on? Do you have professional credits in the field? Or are you just reading articles on the internet and figuring that makes you an expert on the subject? Or are you taking the word of somebody else who is claiming to be an expert? > > If your argument comes down to the claim that buildings don’t burn like that, you’ve got to establish you know what you’re talking about. Again, it isn’t even the fact that fire can cause collapse that I am debating. A steel building of course could collapse given adequate intensity and duration of heat, WTC 1 and 2 were prime examples of that. It is the nature of the collapse. Evenly throughout the whole structure, all at once, accelerating into free-fall demolition style collapse into its own footprint. NIST provided a scientific model for the collapse if you want we can analyze that to see if it holds up. ---
**Author:** ![bombthefeds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/77aa72/32.png) [@bombthefeds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bombthefeds)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/74 "2015-07-06T06:15:40Z")
Okay here is the link to the official NIST report on building 7: [Abstract](http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=861610) [Full Report](http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610) Obviously, this is heavy stuff for a message board, but I don’t see any other way to at least get any of you to even admit the possibility that the explanation the NIST isn’t 100% satisfactory. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/75 "2015-07-06T06:18:58Z")
> [@bombthefeds](#): > > Also, for completeness sake here, many CT’s believe WTC 7 was destroyed to hide information. > > I’m not about to jump full sail on that bandwagon, but here is a [list of the tenants](http://www.wtc7.net/background.html) of the building on 9/11. > > [ul] > [li]Salomon Smith Barney [/li][li]IRS Regional Council [/li][li]U.S. Secret Service [/li][li]C.I.A. [/li][li]American Express Bank International [/li][li]Standard Chartered Bank [/li][li]Provident Financial Management [/li][li]ITT Hartford Insurance Group [/li][li]First State Management Group, Inc [/li][li]Federal Home Loan Bank [/li][li]NAIC Securities [/li][li]Securities & Exchange Commission [/li][li]Mayor’s Office of Emergency Mgmt[/li][/ul] > > It wasn’t just 42 stories of Build-A-Bear workshops to say the least Well, that’s one _real_ purdy job of mud-slingin’, partner. With all those Important people in one building, surely _one_ of them was involved in some conspiracy or another, right? How nice for you-If it were just one or two suspects you might be expected to come up with real evidence, but when you throw the whole damn building into the suspect list all you have to do is stand back and say, “Tsk, tsk. We all know _somebody_ in there is guilty, don’t we?” ---
**Author:** ![bombthefeds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/77aa72/32.png) [@bombthefeds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bombthefeds)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/76 "2015-07-06T06:26:19Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Well, that’s one _real_ purdy job of mud-slingin’, partner. With all those Important people in one building, surely _one_ of them was involved in some conspiracy or another, right? How nice for you-If it were just one or two suspects you might be expected to come up with real evidence, but when you throw the whole damn building into the suspect list all you have to do is stand back and say, “Tsk, tsk. We all know _somebody_ in there is guilty, don’t we?” Just laying out the facts my friend, and addressing the claims of CT’s. In case you’ve notice I’m most interested in investigating the evidence not pointing guilt at Larry Silverstein or anyone else. I would actually love to let Larry and everyone else off the hook entirely, and hopefully we can find that the evidence matches up, and the whole thing really was just a demolition style collapse due to office furniture burning. However, that seems unlikely. For anyone that’s taken a look at the [NIST report](http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610) you’ll notice that they actually did analyze the possibilities of a bomb having been planted by the terrorists, so it’s not all that far fetched an idea is it now. The other thing you’ll notice is that they determine that the building did indeed collapse on one side first and the structure would have deformed and twisted due to weaknesses on one side. It’s a great model, too bad it doesn’t [actually reflect how the building collapsed](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuyZJl9YleY#t=92). ---
**Author:** ![bombthefeds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/77aa72/32.png) [@bombthefeds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bombthefeds)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/77 "2015-07-06T06:44:10Z")
For the skeptics out there, which is everybody I’ll throw you a bone: From page 27 of the [NIST official report](http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610) (p69 of the pdf) discussing hypothetical blast scenarios: > [@](#): > > Preparations for a blast scenario would have been almost impossible to carry out on any floor in the building without detection. Preparations would have included removal of column enclosures or walls, weld torches to cut column sections, and placement of wires for detonation. Occupants, support staff, and visitors would have noticed such activities, particularly since they likely would have occurred around more than one column. I think we could agree it would be almost impossible for a terrorist group to plant the explosives, however not so impossible for the owner of the building to do so, especially if he had ample time. Especially given the tenants that occupied the building. This of course proves nothing, it is simply justifying why suspicion is on Larry Silverstein in the first place. It is our job to clear him of all suspicion. Now come on we’re so close all we have to do match up what we know about the fire with what we know about the building and the laws of physics and we’re done. I mean it can’t be that hard to explain a free-fall collapse without the use of explosives could it? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/78 "2015-07-06T07:02:25Z")
> [@bombthefeds](#): > > NIST provided a scientific model for the collapse if you want we can analyze that to see if it holds up. Did the NIST report conclude that the collapse of the building was caused by explosives? If not, why do you feel competent to declare your knowledge is superior to theirs? ---
**Author:** ![bombthefeds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/77aa72/32.png) [@bombthefeds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bombthefeds)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/79 "2015-07-06T07:10:03Z")
Bone #2: The [NIST official report](http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610) ultimately dismissed the use of explosives on two basis (p29-30 report, p69-70 pdf): [ol] [li]The lack of a window breakage pattern[/li][li]The absence of the sound of such a blast at the time of collapse[/li][/ol] The window breakage pattern is difficult to assess due to the lack of clear visuals of the lower stories of the building. The report says: > [@](#): > > The visual evidence did not show such a breakage pattern on any floor of WTC 7 as late as about 4:00 p.m. or above the 25th floor at the time of the building collapse initiation. The building didn’t collapse till after 5:00pm so this leaves an hour of potential window breakage that of which there is no visual evidence. It also says: > [@](#): > > Views of the northeast corner of WTC 7 at the time of the collapse were obstructed by other buildings. Well that’s self-explanatory and further demonstration that there isn’t sufficient visual evidence to determine on the basis of window breakage pattern that explosives weren’t used. The second reason cited has to do with sound. The report describes that if explosives were used people would have heard them because they would have needed to register at about 130db: > [@](#): > > This sound level is consistent with standing next to a jet plane engine and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert. The sound from such a blast in an urban setting would have been reflected and channeled down streets with minimum attenuation. The report then goes on to say that the sound recordings of the collapse do not demonstrate such loud explosions. Yet, [eyewitness reports contradict](http://rememberbuilding7.org/eyewitnesses/) this and then there are videos such as [this](https://youtu.be/0YvrKfWkxdw) and [this](https://youtu.be/0YvrKfWkxdw). Obviously no major explosion went off right before collapse, but eyewitness reports and videos such as the ones above show there is not conclusive proof that no loud explosions were heard within the last hour of the buildings life. OH LARRY, it’s not looking good for you buddy! ---
**Author:** ![bombthefeds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/77aa72/32.png) [@bombthefeds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bombthefeds)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340/80 "2015-07-06T07:21:13Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Did the NIST report conclude that the collapse of the building was caused by explosives? > > If not, why do you feel competent to declare your knowledge is superior to theirs? So, what we’ve got with the NIST is several models of how the building collapsed. 6 models based on hypothetical explosive blasts, and other models based on fire fueled by office combustibles. My final point, my check mate point is that the NIST didn’t dismiss the models based on explosives because they didn’t reflect the nature of WTC 7’s collapse. They dismissed the basis of the the lack of evidence of window breakage and the sounds of explosives. However, there isn’t sufficient evidence to dismiss window breakage or the sounds of explosives entirely. So, the question remains, allowing the hypothetical explosive models into the playing field what model most accurately reflected the way WTC 7 collapsed. Well given how poorly the fire model matches, even the NIST would have to admit that the explosive model FITS much nicer to how that building fell. Physics wins again. AHHHHHHHH science… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-larry-silverstein-know-about-9-11/724340.md?page=5)