'What about building 7'?

[Gamolon]

It was one of Mr. Jenning's rescuers that claimed BOTH stairwells were obstructed to the 8th floor.

Incorrect. See quote from his rescuer below staring at 1:00. His rescuer had no way of knowing the extent of the damage to the staircase as they couldn't GET to the staircases. For all he knew, they could have been blocked from the lobby to the 15th floor or any other floor for that matter.

It would appear that that rescuer must have been mistaken about the second stairwell though his description of its condition was oddly different (blown out) from that described by Gregori and Hall.

According to the quote below, the reference to "backside" means the "backside" of the building to me. If he was referring to both staircases, he would have said "the backsides" (not backside) "were" (not was).

It was pandemonium. I mean it was like something out of uh.... uh... Bruce Willis Die Hard movie. Uh... He was there and he was crying and there another gentleman crying... and... and... for help. We couldn't get to em. We tried to get through the uh... we... we went through the buildings, we were lost. Both staircases... the backside was completely blown away. There was no way to access, we couldn't get to em.

 

[Miragememories]

It was one of Mr. Jenning's rescuers that claimed BOTH stairwells were obstructed to the 8th floor.

Incorrect. See quote from his rescuer below staring at 1:00. His rescuer had no way of knowing the extent of the damage to the staircase as they couldn't GET to the staircases. For all he knew, they could have been blocked from the lobby to the 15th floor or any other floor for that matter.

BS. The 'rescuer' attempting to reach Mr. Jennings from the ground and could not reach the 8th floor because he refers specifically to being unable to gain access because both staircases had their backside blown away.

It would appear that that rescuer must have been mistaken about the second stairwell though his description of its condition was oddly different (blown out) from that described by Gregori and Hall.

According to the quote below, the reference to "backside" means the "backside" of the building to me. If he was referring to both staircases, he would have said "the backsides" (not backside) "were" (not was).

"It was pandemonium.

It ..something out of a Bruce Willis DIE HARD movie.

um..he was there and he was crying and there was another gentleman crying for help!

We couldn't get to them.

We tried to get through the ..uh.?

We went through the building. We were lost.

Both staircases. The backside was completely blown away.

There was no way to access.

We couldn't get to 'em."

Now you are really quibbling. Two sentences. The second sentence describes the first.

I'm not sure why you are even arguing about this since I just acknowledged that it appears that only the one stairwell used by Mr. Jennings and Mr. Hess was impassable.

My point is, it appears that their rescuer must have been mistaken about the one stairwell, since apparently it was accessible after venting.

 

[jaydeehess]

My point is, it appears that their rescuer must have been mistaken about the one stairwell, since apparently it was accessible after venting.

Well either he was mistaken, or 'the backside' does refer to the south side of WTC7. We know that the east staircase was accessible, and we know that the south side of the building did suffer a lot of damage and debris. I tend to try to assign less error if possible and in this case there is an interpretation that does not require him to be mistaken and still fit the available evidence.

Yes, you now agree that one staircase was physically impassable and the other was too full of dust and smoke to be usable(from the 8th floor) by Hess and Jennings.

 

[GlennB]

Upon perusing the Mark Roddenberry images and listening to his video description of how he came to make these photographs, I have to agree that the NE corner window shows no appearance of having been broken prior to the collapse of 2 WTC.

True.

For Mr. Jennings claim of seeing the WTC twin towers still standing to hold true, he must have made his observation prior to breaking the NE window.

While he was on the 8th floor. Understood.

But when he did break the NE office window, 1 WTC must have already fallen.

True.

This all puts them on the 8th for well over 30 minutes before breaking the window, given that the dust clouds would drive away first-responders for a good while before being able to return - twice - and for cars and buses to catch fire and all.

They came--to the window and they said
They started yelling "do not do that..it won't hold you."
And then they ran away.
See, I didn't know what was going on.
That's when one (WTC2) ..the first tower fell.

Then I saw them come back.
Now I saw them come back with more concern on their faces.
And then they ran away again.
The second tower (WTC1) fell.
So as they turned and ran the second time,
the guy said "don't worry we'll be back for you."
And they did come back.

By your reckoning, having made the very gracious concessions you've just made, these conversations must have happened through an intact window 8 floors up to firefighters on the street.

Is that plausible?

 

[Miragememories]

For Mr. Jennings claim of seeing the WTC twin towers still standing to hold true, he must have made his observation prior to breaking the NE window.

But when he did break the NE office window, 1 WTC must have already fallen.

That would make sense of why Mr. Jennings said; "Once I broke out the windows, I could see..outside below me.

I saw er..police cars..on fire..buses on fire."

While he was on the 8th floor. Understood.

True.

This all puts them on the 8th for well over 30 minutes before breaking the window, given that the dust clouds would drive away first-responders for a good while before being able to return - twice - and for cars and buses to catch fire and all.

By your reckoning, having made the very gracious concessions you've just made, these conversations must have happened through an intact window 8 floors up to firefighters on the street.

Is that plausible?

NO.

You did not read all of my post.

At this point I agree with this portion of your post;

There is nothing wrong with the observations of Barry Jennings that day.

But when he came home and tried to make sense of what he experienced he managed to get his time line wrong.

"See, I didn't know what was going on.

When they started running..the first tower was coming down.

I had no..I had no way of knowing that.

Then I saw them come back.

Now I saw them come back with more concern on their faces.

And then they ran away again.

The second tower fell.

So as they turned and ran the second time,

the guy said "don't worry we'll be back for you."

To make any sense, Mr. Jennings must have misinterpreted those activities, which adds some agreement with what you reported from EMT Jeffrey Warner.

What I am agreeing with is Norseman's belief that Mr. Jenning's observations were right.

But, not having seen the collapses directly, Mr. Jenning's timeline interpretation of what he saw on the street was wrong.

When Mr. Jennings communicated with the firefighters, it was through the NE corner broken window (as witnessed by the video with Mr. Hess), and at that time, unbeknownst to Mr. Jennings, both the WTC twin towers had already fallen.

I know your next question will be why did Mr. Jennings make no obvious mention of what he experienced during those collapses while stranded on the 8th floor. I can only assume, that sometime after observing that the WTC twin towers were standing, in a location where he could no longer 'see' those towers, and not knowing what was going on, his experience of the collapses was reflected in his comments about the darkness, the smoke, the heat, and the constant explosions.

 

[tsig]

Thank you Norseman for providing evidence and in a civil manner instead of the usual incredulous opining that others tend to provide.

Upon perusing the Mark Roddenberry images and listening to his video description of how he came to make these photographs, I have to agree that the NE corner window shows no appearance of having been broken prior to the collapse of 2 WTC.

For Mr. Jennings claim of seeing the WTC twin towers still standing to hold true, he must have made his observation prior to breaking the NE window.

But when he did break the NE office window, 1 WTC must have already fallen.

That would make sense of why Mr. Jennings said; "Once I broke out the windows, I could see..outside below me.

I saw er..police cars..on fire..buses on fire."

At this point I agree with this portion of your post;

​

​

To make any sense, Mr. Jennings must have misinterpreted the activities below, which adds some agreement with what you reported from EMT Jeffrey Warner.

The question still remains as to why he made no obvious mention of what he experienced during the collapses from the 8th floor, unless in his blind situation of not knowing what was going on, the collapses were reflected in his comments about the darkness, the smoke, the heat, and the constant explosions.



Given the circumstances it is not surprising that Mr. Jennings and Mr. Hess would not wait for emergency power to re-activate the elevators.

Regarding the descent from the 23rd floor by Jose Gregori and George Hall, during which time 2WTC collapsed, presumably they both used the other stairwell, which by their own evidence was not obstructed by anything other than heavy smoke.

This does not put Mr. Jenning's claim about a broken stairwell in dispute unless it can be shown that it was the same one used by Gregori and Hall or you can clearly establish witness testimony for a descent on both stairwells at a time that overlapped with the Jennings and Hess attempted descent.

It was one of Mr. Jenning's rescuers that claimed BOTH stairwells were obstructed to the 8th floor.

It would appear that that rescuer must have been mistaken about the second stairwell though his description of its condition was oddly different (blown out) from that described by Gregori and Hall.

But 'only' smoke obstruction would account for how the firefighters eventually reached Jennings and Hess.

Jennings breaking a window with a cup of hot coffee in his hand proves CD?

 

[jaydeehess]

Jennings did not relate his observation of the dust clouds because both towers fell before he was on the eighth floor let alone at the window.

 

[Ape of Good Hope]

Jennings breaking a window with a cup of hot coffee in his hand proves CD?

Now it finally makes sense!

CD = Coffee Defenestration.

 

[GlennB]

What I am agreeing with is Norseman's belief that Mr. Jenning's observations were right.

But, not having seen the collapses directly, Mr. Jenning's timeline interpretation of what he saw on the street was wrong.

Then why can't his recollection of seeing the Towers standing be correct but his memory of where he was at the time be wrong? Why should "he saw them standing while on the 8th floor" be sacrosanct to you?

Well, we all know the answer to that already.

 

[Dog Town]

To think "truthers" don't think the fires in WTC 7 were bad.

[qimg]http://i1124.photobucket.com/albums/l564/dgmwood/NYCTA-Miller_G_CD2-068.jpg[/qimg]

They just wanna be "special", and they ARE!

 

[Miragememories]

Re:The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - The Truth Behind The Third Tower, I finally got around to transcribing the BBC interview with Mr. Hess.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy5lpp6yADw

It is quite fascinating how the producer, Mike Rudin, got what he wanted from Mr. Hess by using some clever editing.

"Michael Hess was Mayor Rudolf Giuliani's chief lawyer, in charge of 800 New York City lawyers.

In his first interview since 9/11 he confirms our timeline.

Hess says all the lights went out and he felt the building shake like an earthquake and he adds that he did not hear explosions.

In his mind he thought there might have been an explosion.
In the only interview he did on 9/11 he told a reporter he had "walked down to the eighth floor where there was an explosion."
But as our interview with him shows, he is now certain that he did not hear an explosion.
He just assumed on the day it could have been an explosion because he had witnessed the lights going out, the staircase filling with smoke and the building shaking vigorously."

But, is this really an accurate description of Mr. Hess's interview?

NO.

Mr. Jennings and Mr. Hess are proceeding down from the 23rd floor at a rapid pace when;

"...we got exactly to 6, all of a sudden, at the same instant, 5 different things happened.

The first was, the lights went out. The emergency lights went out so we were in total darkness.

Second. The stairwell filled up with a tremendous amount of smoke, and dirt, and soot. Much more than it had been before.

Previously, you could breath for about three flights down, but at that point you couldn't breath..at all. So the second thing was the soot.

The third thing was..uh..the sprinklers went on, so all of a sudden we were in the dark, no emergency lights, and the water was pouring down on top of us.

At the same instant, and the last two things were the scariest. The building began to shake and it was as if you were in an earthquake. I've never really been in an earthquake but it was what it felt like. The whole building was shaking.

And the last thing was....the stairway...ran into a wall. All of a sudden, as you were going down on the 6th floor, you hit a wall.

So there I am and I'm saying, "what the heck is happening", and I said to Barry, while shaking we just stood there, and after... I don't know it was 5 seconds or 10 seconds, but the building stopped shaking.

And in my mind I assumed there had been an explosion..ah...in the basement. I don't know why that hit me that way but we couldn't go anywhere. The wall was blocking it. It was pitch dark.

At this point the interview continuity was for some unknown [deliberate] reason broken, and the timeline break was covered by an out-of-focus visual transition edit.

Note the camera always remains on Mr. Hess.

After the edit, the interview has subtlety jumped forward.

Without being immediately obvious to the viewer, Mr. Hess is picked up talking about later on the 8th floor after the NE window has been broken out.

Mr. Hess's pickup response [below] to the edited-out interviewer question initially makes it appear that he is still in the 6th floor stairwell, as Mr. Hess is talking about more building shaking.

"I was nervous but once the building stopped shaking, then I calmed down.

I figured, yes, there was an explosion in the basement..maybe..uhm..but it stopped."

"What had you heard at that stage. By the [incomprehensible] Had you heard any sounds like explosions or big sounds"

"No. Nothing. You heard two things. You heard tremendous wind and you heard a tremendous number of sirens.

And I look out the window, and number one, this ash is flying around, and papers, computer papers are flying around.

And again, I was looking north and west, and the WTC towers were south, so I couldn't see in that direction.

And in my mind they were just still on fire."

Note the interview timeline now has Mr. Hess at the 8th floor, NE window of 7 WTC..

The previous interviewer question was removed so the time reference context of Mr. Hess's picked up statement is lost.

Based on the continuity of his response following the edit, Mr. Hess's second reference to the building shaking and a possible basement explosion, places him on the 8th floor.

This seriously conflicts with the producer's and the NIST's claim that the last building-shaking collapse [1 WTC], occurred when Mr. Hess was at the 6th floor landing.

 

[TJM]

You're just grabbing at straws now.

Pathetic.

 

[Gamolon]

At this point the interview continuity was for some unknown [deliberate] reason broken, and the timeline break was covered by an out-of-focus visual transition edit.

Note the camera always remains on Mr. Hess.

After the edit, the interview has subtlety jumped forward.

Gotta love your dramatic usage of the "unknown [deliberate] reason" description regarding the break in the interview along with the "out-of-focus" transition to try and make it seem like it was done to hide important information that would help truthers crack the conspiracy case.

Funny that if you watch the whole interview, the same type of "out of focus transition break" was used 3 times in the beginning and once again towards the end for a total of 5 times.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/theeditors/2008/10/caught_up_in_a_conspiracy_theo.html?page=12

 

[Norseman]

"I was nervous but once the building stopped shaking, then I calmed down.

I figured, yes, there was an explosion in the basement..maybe..uhm..but it stopped."

"What had you heard at that stage. By the [incomprehensible] Had you heard any sounds like explosions or big sounds"

"No. Nothing. You heard two things. You heard tremendous wind and you heard a tremendous number of sirens.

And I look out the window, and number one, this ash is flying around, and papers, computer papers are flying around.

And again, I was looking north and west, and the WTC towers were south, so I couldn't see in that direction.

And in my mind they were just still on fire."

Note the interview timeline now has Mr. Hess at the 8th floor, NE window of 7 WTC..

The previous interviewer question was removed so the time reference context of Mr. Hess's picked up statement is lost.

Based on the continuity of his response following the edit, Mr. Hess's second reference to the building shaking and a possible basement explosion, places him on the 8th floor.

This seriously conflicts with the producer's and the NIST's claim that the last building-shaking collapse [1 WTC], occurred when Mr. Hess was at the 6th floor landing.

No, Miragememories, I can not see that there is any conflicts here. I think you should consider the very likely possibility, that Michael Hess is talking about his state of mind after escaping from the staircase, and getting into Floor 8. He explains that he calmed down once the shaking he experienced in the staircase stopped. He is not talking about a new event on floor eight, he is referencing his experience in the staircase earlier.

Next he is talking about what he could see and hear from inside Floor 8.

The interview is edited for length, unfortunately some context will be lost for viewers who are not very familiar with the subject that is discussed. But this is a very usual technic, that I have seen used a lot in television interviews. The focus transition is there to make it obvious to the viewer that there is a jump. In addition to length, it could also have been necessary to edit the interview to get the chronology of his experience right, since they could have gone back and forth on his experience during the interview, etc.

Everything Hess describes is fully consistent with the collapse of WTC1.

 

[NoahFence]

MM - now that JREF is riding into the sunset, care to take a stab at explaining and CONNECTING the entire day's events, not just irrelevant minutae?

Please?

 

[Miragememories]

At this point the interview continuity was for some unknown [deliberate] reason broken, and the timeline break was covered by an out-of-focus visual transition edit.

Note the camera always remains on Mr. Hess.

After the edit, the interview has subtlety jumped forward.

Without being immediately obvious to the viewer, Mr. Hess is picked up talking about later on the 8th floor

You're just grabbing at straws now.

Pathetic.

That is an apt description of your denial.

Gotta love your dramatic usage of the "unknown [deliberate] reason" description regarding the break in the interview along with the "out-of-focus" transition to try and make it seem like it was done to hide important information that would help truthers crack the conspiracy case.

Funny that if you watch the whole interview, the same type of "out of focus transition break" was used 3 times in the beginning and once again towards the end for a total of 5 times.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/theeditors/2008/10/caught_up_in_a_conspiracy_theo.html?page=12

Of course there were other, obvious, legitimate edits in Mr. Hess's interview but unlike those earlier edits, the one I am referring to had the effect of marrying an 8th floor observation to a 6th floor location which was self-serving.

Without that edit, Mr. Hess's further account of what he experienced after the explosion at the 6th floor, would have included the retreat to the 8th floor where at some later point he said;

"I was nervous but once the building stopped shaking, then I calmed down.

I figured, yes, there was an explosion in the basement..maybe..uhm..but it stopped."

Mr. Hess is now clearly talking about experiences on the 8th floor. The above quote joins without a time break [edit] with his further observations of;

"You heard two things. You heard tremendous wind and you heard a tremendous number of sirens.

And I look out the window, and number one, this ash is flying around, and papers, computer papers are flying around.

And again, I was looking north and west, and the WTC towers were south, so I couldn't see in that direction.

And in my mind they were just still on fire."

For the BBC documentary and the NIST narrative to be correct, Mr. Hess could not have experienced the "building shaking" and suspected a possible "explosion in the basement" that he described as part of his time on the 8th floor.

No, Miragememories, I can not see that there is any conflicts here. I think you should consider the very likely possibility, that Michael Hess is talking about his state of mind after escaping from the staircase, and getting into Floor 8. He explains that he calmed down once the shaking he experienced in the staircase stopped. He is not talking about a new event on floor eight, he is referencing his experience in the staircase earlier.

Next he is talking about what he could see and hear from inside Floor 8.

The interview is edited for length, unfortunately some context will be lost for viewers who are not very familiar with the subject that is discussed. But this is a very usual technic, that I have seen used a lot in television interviews. The focus transition is there to make it obvious to the viewer that there is a jump. In addition to length, it could also have been necessary to edit the interview to get the chronology of his experience right, since they could have gone back and forth on his experience during the interview, etc.

Everything Hess describes is fully consistent with the collapse of WTC1.

As editor with many years experience I am well aware of the need to edit for time and the tricks of trade used to achieve it.

I also know how effectively edits can misrepresent the truth.

If the only time he supposedly experienced collapse-caused shaking was when Mr. Hess was still on the 6th floor than Mr. Hess's later remarks would have made that clear.

The questionable edit, which took Mr. Hess from the 6th floor stairwell to the 8th floor office, picks up with Mr. Hess talking about calming down after building shaking, and that maybe it was a basement explosion, which appeared to have occurred .

With the interviewer injecting a query about what Mr. Hess heard at that stage, Mr. Hess continues on responding that he heard a tremendous wind and the sound of sirens.."and I look out the window...."

My problem when listening to Mr. Hess is that at no point does he contextually separate his second reference to the building shaking and a possible basement explosion, from rest of what he describes on the 8th floor.

When listening and watching the interview, to me, it sounds like he was describing another building shaking occurrence while on the 8th floor that was followed by his observation of blowing wind, sirens and what he saw from the broken window.

 

[DGM]

Mr. Hess's pickup response [below] to the edited-out interviewer question initially makes it appear that he is still in the 6th floor stairwell, as Mr. Hess is talking about more building shaking.

Seeing we're focusing on detail:

"...we got exactly to 6, all of a sudden, at the same instant, 5 different things happened.

The first was, the lights went out. The emergency lights went out so we were in total darkness.

Why were the emergency lights on?

Second. The stairwell filled up with a tremendous amount of smoke, and dirt, and soot. Much more than it had been before.

Why was there "smoke, and dirt, and soot before".

Come on MM, you can field these questions.

If you accept the overwhelming evidence indicating they arrives after 9:45, there is no mystery.

 

[jaydeehess]

Getting back to the 'explosion' at 6th floor. It should be noted that the 5th floor contained the 900 kW generator in the SW corner directly south of the east stairs.
Page 31 of NCSTAR 1A
That section of floor was gouged out when WTC1 came down and that would have thrown those generators somewhere. I cannot see any evidence of them in the street so they likely went north, towards the stairwell.

 

[jaydeehess]

Re:The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - The Truth Behind The Third Tower, I finally got around to transcribing the BBC interview with Mr. Hess.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy5lpp6yADw

It is quite fascinating how the producer, Mike Rudin, got what he wanted from Mr. Hess by using some clever editing.


But, is this really an accurate description of Mr. Hess's interview?

NO.

Mr. Jennings and Mr. Hess are proceeding down from the 23rd floor at a rapid pace when;



At this point the interview continuity was for some unknown [deliberate] reason broken, and the timeline break was covered by an out-of-focus visual transition edit.

Note the camera always remains on Mr. Hess.

After the edit, the interview has subtlety jumped forward.

Without being immediately obvious to the viewer, Mr. Hess is picked up talking about later on the 8th floor after the NE window has been broken out.

Mr. Hess's pickup response [below] to the edited-out interviewer question initially makes it appear that he is still in the 6th floor stairwell, as Mr. Hess is talking about more building shaking.







Note the interview timeline now has Mr. Hess at the 8th floor, NE window of 7 WTC..

The previous interviewer question was removed so the time reference context of Mr. Hess's picked up statement is lost.

Based on the continuity of his response following the edit, Mr. Hess's second reference to the building shaking and a possible basement explosion, places him on the 8th floor.

This seriously conflicts with the producer's and the NIST's claim that the last building-shaking collapse [1 WTC], occurred when Mr. Hess was at the 6th floor landing.

I don't see anything to definitively have Hess saying there was a second shaking while at the window of the 8th floor.
He is talking about the shaking, and let's assume he is still referring to that which he experienced on the 6th floor. He then moves to explain that this was the result of WTC1 coming down which he now understands was the cause of the fires and papers in the street. However, the whole time he was in WTC7 before contacting people on the street, he thought the towers were still standing thus his thoughts about an explosion in the basement.

How strange that you can blithely say that Jennings was not being strictly chronicalogical and yet assume that Hess has to do so.

Odd too that given nothing more than your own personal and unsubstantiated opinion of a timeline, you assert malfeasance on the part of the BBC.

Note the further indication that both towers had been hit as he says he assumed they, both towers, were still burning. I know that this point has been agreed to by MM but if/when anyone else tries to push a contrary view its another point to make.

 

[Miragememories]

"How strange that you can blithely say that Jennings was not being strictly chronicalogical and yet assume that Hess has to do so."

The interview with Mr. Jennings was raw and uncut.

The BBC did significant cutting and polishing to both their Jenning's and Hess interviews.