[Ed]Hardfire with Mark Roberts and Arthur Scheuerman

[twinstead]

I frequently get told things by my superiors that are intended to inform my opinions - it's a natural part of any job. If I think they're wrong, I tell them. And this is in a job where my survival and those of people relying on me doesn't depend on my being right. People are not mindless automatons, and being told something by your boss doesn't mean you immediately believe it wholeheartedly and remain convinced forever afterwards. I wonder what kind of world you live in, that you could believe it would.

You forget you're talking to a truther; he does indeed pretty much believe everything conspiracy websites and videos tell him like a mindless automaton.

 

[CHF]

Miragememories,

who do think fold those firefighters that WTC7 would collapse?

 

[RedIbis]

What's the consensus? Did most of the firefighters, capts, Lts, and others determine for themselves that WTC 7 would collapse? Or were the majority told that it would collapse?

 

[CHF]

What's the consensus? Did most of the firefighters, capts, Lts, and others determine for themselves that WTC 7 would collapse? Or were the majority told that it would collapse?

Looks to me that most were told.

Two obvious questions arise:

1) what about the FDNY who used their own eyes to determine WTC7 would collapse?

2) who told the others? Could it have been the FDNY who observed WTC7's state with their own eyes?

Either way, it doesn't look good for a CD theory. Unless you wanna implicate at least some FDNY...

 

[RedIbis]

Looks to me that most were told.

Two obvious questions arise:

1) what about the FDNY who used their own eyes to determine WTC7 would collapse?

2) who told the others?

If it looks to you that most were told, you should be able to read through the 86 accounts on Gravy's list and answer both of your questions for yourself.

 

[RedIbis]

Let me just remind you, MM, that you have no reason to believe that these "individual opinions of hundreds of other lower ranking professionals on the scene" differed in any way from the opinion of your "one professional on the scene".

Of course he, or anyone else has reason to, they didn't state such opinions.

 

[CHF]

If it looks to you that most were told, you should be able to read through the 86 accounts on Gravy's list and answer both of your questions for yourself.

I did that, Red.

It's pretty clear to me that those FDNY were told by their comrades that WTC7 would come down.

Who do you think told them?

 

[RedIbis]

I did that, Red.

It's pretty clear to me that those FDNY were told by their comrades that WTC7 would come down.

Who do you think told them?

By "comrades" do you mean other firefighters? Be specific.

Regardless of rank, out of the 86 accounts, how many believe for themselves that bldg collapse was inevitable?

And on several occassions, the accounts do include from where the word came down.

 

[CHF]

Let's see....

We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing. So for the next five or six hours we kept firefighters from working anywhere near that building, which included the whole north side of the World Trade Center complex

Chief Frank Cruthers also says "we."

We made searches. We attempted to put some of the fire out, but we had a pressure problem. I forget the name of the Deputy. Some Deputy arrived at the scene and thought that the building was too dangerous to continue with operations, so we evacuated number 7 World Trade Center.

I went back and I reminded whoever the chief was, I don't know if it was Chief McKavanagh or Chief Blaich, that with 7 World Trade Center in danger of collapsing, you had to be careful, because Con Edison had big transformers in the back that supplied the lower half of Manhattan. So we had to be concerned about electricity, that this may be energized or not be energized.

"We," "the chief," "a deputy," a firefighter personally reporting WTC7's state to the chief....

Yeah the FDNY is looking pretty guilty in the demolition of WTC7.

Edit: Oh crap, the NYPD's in on it to!

A few minutes after that a police officer came up to me and told me that the façade in front of Seven World Trade Center was gone and they thought there was an imminent collapse of Seven World Trade Center.

 

[RedIbis]

Let's see....



Chief Frank Cruthers also says "we."





"We," "the chief," "a deputy," a firefighter personally reporting WTC7's state to the chief....

Yeah the FDNY is looking pretty guilty in the demolition of WTC7.

Edit: Oh crap, the NYPD's in on it to!

Who the hell said the FDNY was guilty of anything? Like I said, out of the 86 accounts, you quoted one firefighter and one chief, who personally believed the bldg was going to collapse. The other two are reported by unnamed sources.

Is that it?

 

[CHF]

Who the hell said the FDNY was guilty of anything? Like I said, out of the 86 accounts, you quoted one firefighter and one chief, who personally believed the bldg was going to collapse. The other two are reported by unnamed sources.

Is that it?

No, I only went through a dozen or so of the FDNY accounts since I don't feel like reading through 86+ right now.

Based on everything I've seen to date, it looks like some FDNY (and NYPD) reported WTC7 would collapse and then passed on the word - which the other FDNY did not question then or since.

If there's anything you'd like to add to that picture then by all means go ahead.

 

[johnny karate]

Who the hell said the FDNY was guilty of anything? Like I said, out of the 86 accounts, you quoted one firefighter and one chief, who personally believed the bldg was going to collapse. The other two are reported by unnamed sources.

Is that it?

RedIbis, are you still flogging this dead horse?

Regardless of how the information was disseminated at the time, some six years later not a single firefighter that was there thinks WTC7 collapsed due to anything other than debris damage and fire. Not one. And you know this.

So what is it you're trying to accomplish here?

 

[Pookster]

What's the consensus? Did most of the firefighters, capts, Lts, and others determine for themselves that WTC 7 would collapse? Or were the majority told that it would collapse?

False dilemma. I can be told something is going to happen and also make my own determination as well. The only way to know any of this is to ... ask the firefighters.

 

[Pookster]

RedIbis, ...

... So what is it you're trying to accomplish here?

Watching RedIbis reminds me of some softball games I played in where the opposing team's coach would constantly remind the umpire about a perceived bad call that had little consequence in a game they were losing badly. It always appeared to me as just an attempt to save some face with any kind of small victory no matter how meaningless it was, and/or to try to focus attention away from just how impotent his/her team really is.

 

[aggle-rithm]

What's the consensus? Did most of the firefighters, capts, Lts, and others determine for themselves that WTC 7 would collapse? Or were the majority told that it would collapse?

I doubt if any firefighter makes judgments based on certainty of future events. Catastrophic events like fires are unpredictable by nature. The questions you would need to ask are:

1. What is the probability of collapse?
2. What is the probability of successfully fighting the fire and avoiding collapse?
3. Are there lives in danger, or just property?

One firefighter may think the fight should continue if there is an 80% chance that the building will collapse without intervention, that there is a 60% chance that it can be saved, and that a few lives can be saved by continuing. Take the lives out of the equation, and he may not think it's worth it.

Another firefighter may come to the same conclusions WRT the probabilities, but think that it's not worth fighting the fire in any event. However, the chances that any two firefighters will come up with the same probabilities are small.

Do you begin to see why it is essential that they follow orders instead of following their gut? You can't make these decisions by consensus, for there are so many different variables that will be interpreted differently by so many different people. Someone has to make a decision. It may be right or it may be wrong, but everyone involved needs to abide by that decision once it's made.

In short, the situation was nowhere near as cut-and-dried as you make it out to be. Conspiracy theories tend to paint the world as being simple and easily modeled with stick figures and mechanistic motivations. That is simply not the case in the real world.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Watching RedIbis reminds me of some softball games I played in where the opposing team's coach would constantly remind the umpire about a perceived bad call that had little consequence in a game they were losing badly. It always appeared to me as just an attempt to save some face with any kind of small victory no matter how meaningless it was, and/or to try to focus attention away from just how impotent his/her team really is.

True...sometimes arguing semantics is all you have.

 

[Swing Dangler]

Is there any chance Hardfire can get a credible guest say like Lou Dobbs? I mean even Alex Jones was able to get Lou Dobbs on his radio show. Maybe you can debunk old Lou's North American Union issue.

 

[Swing Dangler]

No, I only went through a dozen or so of the FDNY accounts since I don't feel like reading through 86+ right now.

Based on everything I've seen to date, it looks like some FDNY (and NYPD) reported WTC7 would collapse and then passed on the word - which the other FDNY did not question then or since.

If there's anything you'd like to add to that picture then by all means go ahead.

CHF, here is a great source with the accounts organized and a decent well balanced analysis. It might save you some time. I know you don't care for the source, but the research is excellent. You can read the analysis here.

 

[DGM]

CHF, here is a great source with the accounts organized and a decent well balanced analysis. It might save you some time. I know you don't care for the source, but the research is excellent. You can read the analysis here.

Swing:
Do you see any importance to this issue? (other than scoring points) If so what?

 

[Pookster]

True...sometimes arguing semantics is all you have.

It's basically been all they had to begin with. It's just more obvious now that they've played almost the entire game and can't back up their original big talk of blowing out their opponent. I'm not impressed with late inning bloop singles in blowout games, but I guess there is some small measure of satisfaction when you been in a long hitless streak.