Truthers and the FDNY

[johnny karate]

Which is what I said two of the three times I had to restate it. I was more accurate the two times I said someone in the OEM passed the word to Currid, I was being less literal and not as careful as I could have when I used the phrase, "to the street." My sincerest apologies.

No, you were just lying.

When you first brought it up, it was in response to this question:

So how come the FDNY knew that WTC7 was going to collapse?

To which you answered:

Because as Capt. Currid explains, the OEM had passed the word to the street.

You were attempting to make it seem as if the OEM informed the FDNY of the impending collapse of WTC7.

Now that your dishonest misrepresentation of what Currid said has been shoved in your face, you're just back-pedaling.

Unless you want to explain how one member of the FDNY being told by one person in the OEM about the collpase of WTC7 constitutes an answer to the question "So how come the FDNY knew that WTC7 was going to collapse?".

No? I didn't think so.

 

[1337m4n]

Simple Red, just go ask the firefighters. Why bother asking us if they knew or were told when you can go and find out.

RedIbis:

Here is a form to e-mail the FDNY commissioner:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/mail/html/mailfdny.html

If you are interested in the truth, you will use that as a starting point for your own investigation.

Let us know what you find out.

 

[Alt+F4]

roundhead contends that members of the FDNY were coerced into silence, thus making them lowlife cowards more interested in salvaging their pensions than seeking justice for the 343 of their own that gave their lives on 9/11.

First "truthers" have to prove that New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli (who manages the FDNY pension fund) is somehow involved in their mess.

Next they have to explain the silence of the hundreds of people who were uniformed first responders (FDNY, NYPD and PAPD) on 9/11 but who are no longer employed by the City of New York. You know, the folks who didn't put in their twenty years and are not receiving a city pension. What keeps their silence?

 

[RedIbis]

RedIbis:

Here is a form to e-mail the FDNY commissioner:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/mail/html/mailfdny.html

If you are interested in the truth, you will use that as a starting point for your own investigation.

Let us know what you find out.

I think I know how to find an email address when I need one. This foolish debunking tactic, which we might call the 'why doncha go ask him' challenge looks to deny existing testimony.

 

[WildCat]

Oh look, RedIbis is still lying, playing dumb, and running away from questions when the answers will make him look foolish.

Dance RedIbis, dance!

 

[funk de fino]

I think I know how to find an email address when I need one. This foolish debunking tactic, which we might call the 'why doncha go ask him' challenge looks to deny existing testimony.

So firefighters who say that the fires in WTC7 were huge, or raging infernos, or fully involved or among the largest the FDNY have ever dealt with are correct then?

Yes or no?

I am asking you, not asking you to ask someone else?

 

[Disbelief]

I think I know how to find an email address when I need one. This foolish debunking tactic, which we might call the 'why doncha go ask him' challenge looks to deny existing testimony.

Well Red, how exactly would you like us to debunk your speculation? Would you believe any of us if we said we talked to the FDNY?

Of course, you won't do anything because this way you can be comfortable in your world.

 

[johnny karate]

I think I know how to find an email address when I need one. This foolish debunking tactic, which we might call the 'why doncha go ask him' challenge looks to deny existing testimony.

Actually, the word you're looking for is "clarify". But of course as we all know, the last thing you or any other Truther wants is clarification. Then you couldn't go on dishonestly misrepresenting what these people have said, as we've seen you do numerous times.

 

[1337m4n]

I think I know how to find an email address when I need one. This foolish debunking tactic, which we might call the 'why doncha go ask him' challenge looks to deny existing testimony.

So you're not interested in the answer to your own question?

Why did you ask it then?

If you're accusing me of trying to "deny existing testimony", then the natural question that follows from that is: what is it you think the "existing testimony" proves?

If the "existing testimony" does not prove anything substantial, I'm afraid interviewing the FDNY yourself is the only option.

And even if the "existing testimony" DOES prove something, why would I care to deny it when it's obvious that you don't have the initiative to actually do anything with that evidence? I'll say right now that I accept all the testimony that exists so far; now what?*

So, how about it? Does the "existing testimony" prove beyond a reasonable doubt what happened to WTC-7?

No?

Then why not talk to the FDNY? What do you intend to gain by posting on this forum instead?

I'm not trying to "deny" squat. I'm trying to get you to stop throwing a temper tantrum about how the investigation wasn't thorough enough and actually get your lazy butt off the computer and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

If you will not do that, then all you've proven is that your only purpose on this forum is to troll.





*If you intend to answer only one question in this post, make it this one.

 

[RedIbis]

Then why not talk to the FDNY?

I'm just going to address this because nearly all of the last few posts are trying to play this card and the rest of your post was simply nonsensical ramblings.

The testimonies of the firefighters are extensive and widely accessible. They have not been contested. The discussion is about these reports.

 

[johnny karate]

The testimonies of the firefighters are extensive and widely accessible. They have not been contested. The discussion is about these reports.

But you have to stop lying about what these testimonies actually say before an honest discussion can take place.

 

[WildCat]

But you have to stop lying about what these testimonies actually say before an honest discussion can take place.

RedIbis can't help himself, his fingers hit the keyboard and all that comes out are lies.

 

[Senenmut]

maybe this engineer is the same engineer that was "right on the money" concerning the time wtc 7 would collapse.

WTC7 Messenger Sent to Warn of “Total Collapse of Towers”

In this segment from CNN’s Firehouse 54-4 special, Jim Dwyer from the New York Times tells a story about an engineer at World Trade Center 7 having an impromptu meeting with other unidentified people in the lobby of Building 7. The engineer states that he believes a “total collapse of the towers is possible,” and sends a messenger to Fire Chief Pete Ganci to relay the message. Upon hearing the engineer’s suspicion, Ganci then asks, “Who would tell you a thing like that?”
http://hidhist.wordpress.com/terror/911/wtc7-barry-jennings-peter-ganci-giuliani-arnold-weick/

this engineer seems to be "right on the money" as fire chief hayden says. could this be the source of the firefighters believing that wtc 7 will fall?

Deputy Chief Hayden - start at 19:35
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9072062020229593250

Hayden: "Well we had our special operations people set up surveying instruments to monitor and see if there was any movement of the building. We were concerned of the possibility of collapse of the building, and we had a discussion with one particular engineer and we asked him if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse and, if so, how soon. And it turned out that he was pretty much right on the money that he said in its current state you have about five hours."


lucky guess?????

 

[DavidJames]

poor response, deleted,

 

[R.Mackey]

For a structure rated for 2-3 hours fire protection, and assuming loss of stability needed over three floors to precipitate a total collapse, gives you a BOE estimate of six to nine hours, call it six since we're looking for a lower bound. The FDNY decided to give up on it around 11:00 AM at the earliest, so that gives you a guess of 5:00 PM collapse.

Elementary. Although other estimates, and other collapse times, were certainly possible -- I only wish to explain that the estimate proferred seems completely reasonable from first principles. To claim that such an estimate is not reasonable without some kind of secret knoweldge, however, is not only ignorant, but in fact a Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy. You have no idea how many other estimates they solicited, or their distribution.

 

[johnny karate]

I'm not sure how constructive determining "the source" for the claim that WTC7 was in danger of collapsing is, nor why certain Truthers are trying to make an argument that it came from some entity other than the firefighters who were on the scene.

Whether it was the OEM, some mysterious engineer, or whoever, all you Truthers are doing is implying (or in RedIbis' case, re-establishing a previous implication) that the firefighters at WTC7 are just a bunch of dupes too stupid to discern in person whatever it is you've determined is suspicious by watching a Youtube video.

In other words, your arguments are stupid and insulting, and therefore, par for course.

 

[Senenmut]

I'm not sure how constructive determining "the source" for the claim that WTC7 was in danger of collapsing is, nor why certain Truthers are trying to make an argument that it came from some entity other than the firefighters who were on the scene.

Whether it was the OEM, some mysterious engineer, or whoever, all you Truthers are doing is implying (or in RedIbis' case, re-establishing a previous implication) that the firefighters at WTC7 are just a bunch of dupes too stupid to discern in person whatever it is you've determined is suspicious by watching a Youtube video.

In other words, your arguments are stupid and insulting, and therefore, par for course.

wouldnt it be nice if nist identifed this engineer and found how what he saw and why he thought the way he did to estimate a building falling down in 5 hrs and be RIGHT ON THE MONEY. remember, the nist said that the building would have survived if it wasnt for that damn thermal expansion. and what did those instuments measure while they were set up in wtc 7??? it would be interesting to know.

 

[johnny karate]

wouldnt it be nice if nist identifed this engineer and found how what he saw and why he thought the way he did to estimate a building falling down in 5 hrs and be RIGHT ON THE MONEY. remember, the nist said that the building would have survived if it wasnt for that damn thermal expansion. and what did those instuments measure while they were set up in wtc 7??? it would be interesting to know.

I fail to see the relevance of a qualified expert making an assessment well within the parameters of his field of expertise that turns out to be correct.

 

[funk de fino]

I'm just going to address this because nearly all of the last few posts are trying to play this card and the rest of your post was simply nonsensical ramblings.

The testimonies of the firefighters are extensive and widely accessible. They have not been contested. The discussion is about these reports.

So firefighters who say that the fires in WTC7 were huge, or raging infernos, or fully involved or among the largest the FDNY have ever dealt with are correct then?

 

[RedIbis]

So firefighters who say that the fires in WTC7 were huge, or raging infernos, or fully involved or among the largest the FDNY have ever dealt with are correct then?

Go right ahead and quote an FDNY member saying that the fire in 7 was "among the largest the FDNY have (sic) ever dealt with".