Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[NoahFence]

FDNY was not able to consider the possibility of fighting the fires in WTC 7 until approximately 1:00 p.m."


You bolded the wrong part. They weren't able to consider it till 1:00. And when they did they came back with a hearty "Expletive deleted" THAT!

 

[sylvan8798]

Idiotic denial tactic.

Demand I tell you what I could not possibly know or you will ignore what we do know.

It is only necessary to establish "what" - the "where and when" are a given.

An investigation will reveal the "who" and "why".

So you're saying that you won't answer the questions posed by other posters because those are things you don't know - fair enough. You think you have stumbled onto a clue, some kind of important fact, but you don't know where it leads or what it means. Just that there is a contradiction in your mind between the NIST report and what could, to your thinking, have been done. Okay.

But it seems to me that if you cannot carry your clue forward to finding the next step, the next important connection, the relevance of your clue, then it is useless to you. You cannot determine if it is relevant or not. It's like someone finds a broken glass at a crime scene. Maybe that's a clue - maybe it has fingerprints, or dna, or was the murder weapon. Or maybe it had absolutely nothing to do with anything. It isn't enough just to find broken glass.

 

[NoahFence]

They had water next door at the Verizon building.

Are you for real?

 

[NoahFence]

FDNY was not able to consider the possibility of fighting the fires in WTC 7 until approximately 1:00 p.m."
In other words, at about 1:00 p.m., they had the water and personnel to to fight the fires in WTC 7.

Reading comprehension really isn't your strong suit, is it?

CONSIDER. Look that up.

FACT:
By about 1:00 p.m. they had enough water and personnel to fight the fires in WTC 7.

Sorry dude. You're wrong. Simply wrong.

 

[Mikey T]

"Due to the focus on rescuing people trapped in the debris field, providing aid to the injured, and the loss of water in the hydrant system, FDNY was not able to consider the possibility of fighting the fires in WTC 7 until approximately 1:00 p.m."
In other words, at about 1:00 p.m., they had the water and personnel to to fight the fires in WTC 7.

Since you seem to ignore what is also relevant in the above quote from NIST I have taken the liberty to highlight it once again. It appears your understanding of the English language may be the problem which in turn hinders your reading comprehension. Below I have provided some assistance.

con·sid·er
verb /kənˈsidər/ 
considered, past participle; considered, past tense; considering, present participle; considers, 3rd person singular present

1.Think carefully about (something), typically before making a decision
- each application is considered on its merits
- it is my considered opinion that we should await further developments


2.Think about and be drawn toward (a course of action)
- he had considered giving up his job


3.Regard (someone or something) as having a specified quality
- I consider him irresponsible


4.Believe; think
- at first women were considered to be at low risk from HIV
- I don't consider that I'm to blame


5.Take (something) into account when making an assessment or judgment
- one service area is not enough when you consider the number of cars using this highway


6.Look attentively at
- he considered the women around the table with wariness



pos·si·bil·i·ty
noun /ˌpäsəˈbilətē/ 
possibilities, plural

1.A thing that may happen or be the case
- the theoretical possibility of a chain reaction
- there was always the possibility that he might be turned down


2.The state or fact of being likely or possible; likelihood
- there was no possibility of recompense for him


3.A thing that may be chosen or done out of several possible alternatives
- one possibility is to allow all firms to participate
- there are three possibilities for obtaining extra money


4.Unspecified qualities of a promising nature; potential
- the house was old but it had possibilities



Until you understand that there were considerations and possibilites involved in the FDNY's decision concerning building 7, you will be lost to your dellusions. It's beyond stubborness for you it seems, it's only a lacking mental capability to properly reason, which is border line mentally ill when all is said and done. I feel sorry for you in some odd way because you don't seem to think you need any professional help. If you have sought professional help, you need to go back and have another treatment.

 

[Christopher7]

con·sid·er
verb /kənˈsidər/ 
considered, past participle; considered, past tense; considering, present participle; considers, 3rd person singular present

Consider this:

"[FONT=&quot]Then we received an order from Fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7."
Capt. Boyle - Firehouse Magazine

Keep reading it until you understand what it says.
[/FONT]

 

[TJM]

consider this:

"[font=&quot]then we received an order from fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7." that was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn’t really keen on the idea. Then this other officer i’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So i’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see.

So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and butch brandeis came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, visconti, he was on west street, and i guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.
Capt. Boyle - firehouse magazine

keep reading it until you understand what it says.
[/font]

ftfy.

 

[Mikey T]

Consider this:

"[FONT=&quot]Then we received an order from Fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7."
Capt. Boyle - Firehouse Magazine

Keep reading it until you understand what it says.
[/FONT]

http://www.firehouse.com/magazine/911/captain-chris-boyle

Quote in entirty as Capt. Boyle and his company made their way down to Ground Zero at approximately 11 AM-12 PM:

Boyle: There were four engines and at least three trucks. So we're heading east on Vesey, we couldn't see much past Broadway. We couldn't see Church Street. We couldn't see what was down there. It was really smoky and dusty.

Before we took off, he said, look, if you see any apparatus, strip the apparatus for hose, nozzles, masks, anything you can get. As we headed east, we reached Church and then we were midway from there and then all of a sudden, we could see 5 come into view. It was fully involved. There was apparatus burning all over the place. Guys were scrambling around there. There were a lot of firemen, and there was a lot of commotion, but you couldn't see much that was going on. I didn't see any lines in operation yet. But we found a battalion rig there. We got a couple of harnesses out of there. We had some bottles from another rig, so we put together a couple of masks.

We went one block north over to Greenwich and then headed south. There was an engine company there, right at the corner. It was right underneath building 7 and it was still burning at the time. They had a hose in operation, but you could tell there was no pressure. It was barely making it across the street. Building 6 was fully involved and it was hitting the sidewalk across the street. I told the guys to wait up.

A little north of Vesey I said, we'll go down, let's see what's going on. A couple of the other officers and I were going to see what was going on. We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what's going on. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good.

But they had a hoseline operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too. Then we received an order from Fellini, we're going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn't look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn't really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I'm standing next to said, that building doesn't look straight. So I'm standing there. I'm looking at the building. It didn't look right, but, well, we'll go in, we'll see.

So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody's going into 7, there's creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.

See, they made a move on 7, someone with a better grasp of the situation told them no and it was a bad idea. Simple for most, obviously not for you. Basically it says you have no idea what you are talking about you cherry picking quote miner. The entire inverview with Capt. Boyle puts it all in perspective. What's with you Chris 7? Is your ideology being threatened to the point that you can not reason properly, it's obvious you only like to argue about things you don't understand, but that's besides the point. Like I said before, I'm not trying to be condesending when I say I think you need some professional help. Your mindset cannot be a healthy existence.

 

[tsig]

Originally Posted by tsig
Ok, so what do you think is the reason the fire in WTC7 wasn't fought?

This is a child's game. Ignore the facts and ask your opponent to speculate so you can make snotty remarks.

FACT:
By about 1:00 p.m. they had enough water and personnel to fight the fires in WTC 7.

So why didn't they fight the fires in WTC 7?

 

[000063]

Tsig, haven't you learned that asking Chris7 for the logical inferences from his assertions is irrelevant?

 

[triforcharity]

This is an interesting paragraph for several reasons.
"They did not observe any fires at this time on the 8th floor or 9th floor"
This was about 1:15 to 1:30 p.m.
The fire on floor 8 first appeared on the north face at about 3:40 p.m.
The fire on floor 9 first appeared on the north face shortly before 4:00 p.m.

If you refuse to consider arson then you are in denial.

So now, not only is the FDNY incompetant/in on it, they are also arsonists and felons. (Arson to an occupied dwelling is a 1st deg. felony IIRC.) 30 years to life.

Pick one Chris7. Either way, you're still wrong.

 

[triforcharity]

More help was arriving from the other boroughs and Jersey all day.

Yep. And 343 of FDNY's finest were missing, and the ones that were left uninjured were relived so they could take a few minutes, drink some water, cry, smoke, take a ****, call their family, wash **** out of their eyes etc. etc. etc.

That is why YOU'RE a carpenter, and firefighters are firefighters.

 

[triforcharity]

Strawman. I never implied it was prioritized over anything.
NIST indicated that they had all the higher priorities covered by 1:00 p.m. in this statement.

"Due to the focus on rescuing people trapped in the debris field, providing aid to the injured, and the loss of water in the hydrant system, FDNY was not able to consider the possibility of fighting the fires in WTC 7 until approximately 1:00 p.m."
In other words, at about 1:00 p.m., they had the water and personnel to to fight the fires in WTC 7.

No. No. No. No.

You're acting like one of my first year students who are under the impression that they know the difference between their ass**** and a hole in the ground.

That is NOT what that sentence is saying at all.

consider the possibility of fighting the fires

What does THAT mean. Since that is a MAJOR portion of that sentence, what do you THINK that means?

Do try to answer the question using your own words, not NIST's or anyone elses.

Right after that, please also answer this too.
"Ok, so what do you think is the reason the fire in WTC7 wasn't fought? "

 

[000063]

So now, not only is the FDNY incompetant/in on it, they are also arsonists and felons. (Arson to an occupied dwelling is a 1st deg. felony IIRC.) 30 years to life.

Pick one Chris7. Either way, you're still wrong.

Cue declaration that he doesn't have to pick, and just asking is irrelevant or some sort of game. It's the only response he has, now that he's argued himself into a corner.

 

[triforcharity]

ftfy.

I just found the same thing AJM. Pulled out that issue of FHM.

I'll bold a few points for chris7.

""then we received an order from fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7." that was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn’t really keen on the idea. Then this other officer i’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So i’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see.

So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and butch brandeis came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, visconti, he was on west street, and i guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.
Capt. Boyle - firehouse magazine"

Feel free to google for the definitions of those words.

 

[leftysergeant]

Yep. And 343 of FDNY's finest were missing, and the ones that were left uninjured were relived so they could take a few minutes, drink some water, cry, smoke, take a ****, call their family, wash **** out of their eyes etc. etc. etc.

That is why YOU'RE a carpenter, and firefighters are firefighters.

I speculated earlier that Christopher7 seemed not to have any military experience. This is one of the points that he seems to have missed. Fire fighting is more like a military operation than a job like construction.

An hour on a fire of the size we are discussing is probably comparable to a full shift on most construction jobs I have worked on.

It also has a little more serious emotional consequences, too.

Every now and then, you have to pull people off the front line to re-equip, see to their personal needs and let the medics have a look at them, and make sure that nobody is ignoring an injury that should put them out of action for a while.

Goes right over some people's heads.

 

[sylvan8798]

Maybe that's why they call it "cherry picking" - because cherries have pits. If you pick the words out of context, you are left with something that has no relation to anything - kind of like making a pie out of cherry pits. Christopher7 is out of his element, and really should go to a dark corner and ask himself why he believes this crap, and then become a rabid debunker.

We can only hope. (And I don't lose hope, because others here have seen their way clear of the lies perpetrated by 9/11 Truthers.)

 

[sylvan8798]

I speculated earlier that Christopher7 seemed not to have any military experience. This is one of the points that he seems to have missed. Fire fighting is more like a military operation than a job like construction.

An hour on a fire of the size we are discussing is probably comparable to a full shift on most construction jobs I have worked on.

It also has a little more serious emotional consequences, too.

Every now and then, you have to pull people off the front line to re-equip, see to their personal needs and let the medics have a look at them, and make sure that nobody is ignoring an injury that should put them out of action for a while.

Goes right over some people's heads.

It's definitely alot more like a military experience, in that they are periodically exposed to extreme danger, although between those times they are "safe". What slays me is the idea that firefighters/first responders are keeping quiet about 9/11 because of fears for their own safety, when they put their lives on the line all the time fighting fires, or whatever other duties they perform. In our area alone, I have heard of firefighters, police, EMTs, etc. being killed, paralyzed, maimed in the line of duty. There was even a NUN who worked in a REALLY bad neighborhood and who was killed in a gang murder. But, of course, they would not narc on the 9/11 perps for fear of losing their pensions....yeah, right.

 

[Sunstealer]

You are the one with a reading comprehension problem.

Nope it's you. You are focusing on the wrong part, because it suits you to do that. Here let me help you.

"FDNY was not able to consider the possibility of fighting the fires in WTC 7 until approximately 1:00 p.m."

"FDNY was not able to consider the possibility of fighting the fires in WTC 7 until approximately 1:00 p.m."

"FDNY was not able to consider the possibility of fighting the fires in WTC 7 until approximately 1:00 p.m."

Do you get it now chris? Probably not. Let me spell it out for you.

What this means is they only considered the possibilility of being able to fight the fire in WTC 7 nothing else.

They could have had enough water, enough manpower, enough equipment etc and still not fought the fire in WTC 7 because they had other, higher, priorities or it was considered too dangerous or a number of other reasons.

Why don't you put in a FOIA request and try and find out?

Now this forum is a conspiracy forum, so why are you raising the point about WTC 7 and it's fire fighting, when you don't consider this to be part of the conspiracy? You seem to be raising a red herring. What's your *********** point man?

Edit - I've just read Mikey T's post with the quote in full context.

Seems you like to cherry pick C7 - what have you got to say for your sorry self now? You obviously had read that full passage but you chose to quote a tiny portion of it without acknowledging all the parts trifc has highlighted. Care to address them?

 

[twinstead]

Edit - I've just read Mikey T's post with the quote in full context.

It's obvious from reading the full quote that this guy Butch Brandies is in on it...