It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chief Nigro FDNY, WTC7 Conspiracies "without merit"

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 01:02 PM
link   
The JRef forum has recently posted a letter from Daniel Nigro.

Here it is:


Regarding WTC 7: The long-awaited US Government NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) report on the collapse of WTC 7 is due to be published at the end of this year (although it has been delayed already a few times [ adding fuel to the conspiracy theorists fires!]). That report should explain the cause and mechanics of the collapse in great detail. Early on the afternoon of September 11th 2001, following the collapse of WTC 1 & 2, I feared a collapse of WTC 7 (as did many on my staff).
The reasons are as follows:

1 - Although prior to that day high-rise structures had never collapsed, The collapse of WTC 1 & 2 showed that certain high-rise structures subjected to damage from impact and from fire will collapse.
2. The collapse of WTC 1 damaged portions of the lower floors of WTC 7.
3. WTC 7, we knew, was built on a small number of large columns providing an open Atrium on the lower levels.
4. numerous fires on many floors of WTC 7 burned without sufficient water supply to attack them.

For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit.

Regards, Dan Nigro
Chief of Department FDNY (retired)



911guide.googlepages.com...

forums.randi.org...


this was an E-mail obtained by a member at the JRef forum and validated by a moderator there.


Ref asked me to confirm that the email came from Daniel Nigro's personal email address, and I have done so. The email is from Daniel Nigro.
forums.randi.org...

[edit on 23-9-2007 by CaptainObvious]

[edit on 23-9-2007 by CaptainObvious]




posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 02:00 PM
link   
ok then, please explain the multiple explosions heard, the countdown, the pull it statement. On top of that the disrespect of the crime scene, the quick exportation of steel, the microbeads. The eroneous statements from the burning bush administration. I dont care what any official says, as far as im concerned they are sellouts hiding a secret that will one day destroy my country, why should i care what this hired geek says?



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 02:05 PM
link   
I feel sorry for the likes of Nigro - after all, unless he says aliens demolished WTC7 using heat rays and nuclear bombs controlled via HAARP some folk just won't believe anything he says .....

IF WTC7 was deliberately brought down as part of a major conspiracy, why wasn't it demolished when one of the adjacent towers collapsed?

Either there is no conspiracy. Or the conspirators are incompetent morons.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by mastermind77
why should i care what this hired geek says?


Mastermind....what a brilliant statement.

Here is some information on the "hired geek"


Chief of Department (ret.) Daniel A. Nigro became the 29th Chief to lead the New York City Fire Department on the afternoon of September 11th 2001. A native and life-long resident of Queens County, Chief Nigro entered the Fire Department in 1969 and quickly and steadily rose through the ranks from firefighter to lieutenant, captain, battalion and deputy chief. He was appointed a staff chief in October of 1994. His vast experience includes service in the boroughs of Manhattan, Queens, Bronx and Brooklyn as well as administrative positions. He served as Assistant Chief of Operations where he was responsible for instituting a Certified First Responder Program which brought, for the first time, fire units into New York City’s Emergency Medical Repsonse. He worked on the merger of EMS and FDNY and became the first Chief of EMS in 1996.

From 1997 to 1999 he was a Citywide Tour Commander in charge of fire and emergency management at major incidents throughout the city. As Chief of Operations (the second highest uniformed rank) from 1999-2001, he oversaw the daily management of all FDNY Units. It is in that capacity that he responded to the tragedy of September 11th, assisting in the Incident Command, surviving both collapses and, upon the death of Chief of Department Peter J. Ganci Jr., assuming the role of Incident Commander that afternoon. As Chief of Department, Chief Nigro held the highest uniformed position in the Department during its most difficult days and helped to get the Department back on its feet, ready to protect the citizens of this city. He retired from the Dept. in Sept. of 2002 and was appointed to Fire Commissioner Scoppetta’s Terrorism Advisory Committee.

During Chief Nigro’s career he earned some of the Department’s most honored and prestigious awards including the Fire Commissioner’s Award for Outstanding Service and the Leon Lowenstein Award. He has been recognized for outstanding service and performance by the governments of New York City, New York State, The United States, Italy (The Order of Merit of the Republic – Cavaliere) and France (Fourragere).

Chief Nigro was born in New York City on October 11, 1948 and has resided there all of his life. He holds a Bachelor of Business Administration (1971) from Baruch College. He has lectured at NYU Stern College of Business, Columbia University Graduate Program and been a speaker at many other venues.


Yeah master... real big hired "geek"



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by mastermind77
ok then, please explain the multiple explosions heard


Major buildings on fire often experience explosions. At least, they do in the UK. I assume the same in the USA. I'd be more suspicious is no explosions were heard.


the countdown


Unsubstantiated, possibly minsunderstanding, quite possibly a hoax


, the pull it statement.


In English, it means stop the operation, pull the men out ...

But the disinformationalists won't give in until we're all at each others throats ..... they thrive on stirring hatred and disrespect. And will pillory anyone who dares speak the truth.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 02:56 PM
link   
So, according to Nigro (emphasis added)...


I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone.


To whom did Silverstein speak when he later recalled...



I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire. And I said, “You know, we’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is… is pull it.” Er… and they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 03:08 PM
link   
This will be debated ad nausea for decades. The dearth of information indicates this was a calculated Pearl Harbor 2001. The Israelis dancing about their white van and videotaping the collapse enraging Jersey residents and call for arrest etc, etc, etc. Truth is, we will NEVER know the whole truth. IMHO.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 04:41 PM
link   
1. This shows that he is a fire official and he thought the building would collapse.
2. The building did in fact collapse.
3. Nothing in his training told him it would collapse, he ascertained that himself.

Now why don't we (OCTers) believe the (multiple) firemen and police that say there were bombs, that were trained to differentiate between bombs and falling bodies?

I smell a double standard here.

BTW, if I was a fireman, and 2 skyscrapers just collapsed in the same complex and I was standing next to a burning skyscraper, I would certainly clear it also. That's strictly from a liability issue. I am not saying this is necessarily what he did, I am just saying almost anyone would have made the same call.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 04:47 PM
link   
I'm as skeptical as they come. I'm pretty sharp too and I can tell you right now that WTC 7 was imploded. I love ruining conspiracy theorists days with rational thought as any jerk off does.. But building 7 was a controlled demolition and I'm sorry to say it. I wish it wasn't that way.

[edit on 23-9-2007 by DeadFlagBlues]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by coughymachine
To whom did Silverstein speak when he later recalled...


Heheh. Had he remained silent he would never have created this question you brought up.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
In English, it means stop the operation, pull the men out ...


No it doesn't, and the only reason you think it does is cause you believe the BS, not cause you really know.

Phone call to Controlled Demolition Inc

Pls show me an example of the use of the term 'pull it' in the context you claim, thanx.

Yeah and who cares what this fire chief says? I'd rather believe my own eyes and the conclusion I come to from experience. The captain has a problem with actual evidence so he has to discredit people he disagrees with, and claims those who comments he does agree with are the only ones telling the truth...


But none of these people, whatever they say, can change the fact that for the towers to have collapsed the way they did, without help from some kind of explosive, they would have had to break a few laws of physics. With help from Allah I suppose...


[edit on 23/9/2007 by ANOK]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 07:58 PM
link   


1. This shows that he is a fire official and he thought the building would collapse.


Firemen are taught to watch for any signs of structural instability or
collapse potential. I attended a seminar on building collapse given
by FDNY members several months before 911. My instructors were
many of the same fireground commanders that day.

WTC 7 had been struck by debris from North Tower collapse which
ripped a gash 10 stories high into the south face with damage
extending another 10 floors. No water available to fight the fires
which were starting to spread (water mains cut by collapse and
internal plumbing for standpipes damaged). Hundreds of your men
(including the chief of department) dead, injured and missing. In addition
your men are reporting the building is out of plumb and making
creaking noises.

Now what do you do? Send dozens of your men into an empty building
which is showing signs of structural instability or "pull" them back.

Shortly after noon (12PM) the fireground commanders ordered WTC 7
evacuated.

The call to Silverstien came much later in the afternoon, sometime after
2PM when it was becoming apparent the WTC 7 may collapse.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
WTC 7 had been struck by debris from North Tower collapse which
ripped a gash 10 stories high into the south face with damage
extending another 10 floors. No water available to fight the fires
which were starting to spread (water mains cut by collapse and
internal plumbing for standpipes damaged).


There is absolutely no evidence of this at all. Pls show me this 10 story gash and raging fires.
So what if there was no water? It's obvious from pictures we have that there were no raging fires. If you have pics that show the opposite then pls provide them.

In any case none of this would cause a symmetrical collapse into it's own footprint. A-symmetrical damage cannot cause symmetrical collapses, period. The building even showed the classic central 'kink' of a controlled demo. Learn about CD's and you'll understand my point.
You are hanging on to hollywood physics that might sound like they make sense, but when you really look at it they obviously don't.

It fell in it's own footprint...



And showed a classic CD event, the 'kink'...(causes building to fall inwards instead of out)



C'mon could it be any more obvious...



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 09:25 PM
link   


1. We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors. –FDNY Lieutenant Robert LaRocca

2. ...Just when you thought it was over, you're walking by this building and you're hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames. It's like, is it coming down next? Sure enough, about a half an hour later it came down. –FDNY Lieutenant James McGlynn

3. I walked out and I got to Vesey and West, where I reported to Frank [Cruthers]. He said, we’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down. At this point, the fire was going virtually on every floor, heavy fire and smoke that really wasn’t bothering us when we were searching because it was being pushed southeast and we were a little bit west of that. I remember standing just where West and Vesey start to rise toward the entrance we were using in the World Financial Center. There were a couple of guys standing with me and a couple of guys right at the intersection, and we were trying to back them up – and here goes 7. It started to come down and now people were starting to run. –FDNY Deputy Chief Nick Visconti






1. The major concern at that time was number Seven, building number Seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing. –FDNY Chief Frank Fellini

2. At that time, other firefighters started showing up, Deputy Battalion Chief Paul Ferran of the 41 Battalion, and James Savastano of the First Division assigned to the Second Battalion showed up and we attempted to search and extinguish, at the time which was small pockets of fire in 7 World Trade Center. We were unaware of the damage in the front of 7, because we were entering from the northeast entrance. We weren't aware of the magnitude of the damage in the front of the building. – FDNY Captain Anthony Varriale

[Shortly after the tower collapses] I don’t know how long this was going on, but I remember standing there looking over at building 7 and realizing that a big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side. I looked up at the building and I saw smoke in it, but I really didn't see any fire at that time. Deputy ––Chief Nick Visconti /paqux





Above are small sample of eyewitness interviews with FDNY personnel
on the scene.

Here are links so can read them all. Though I rather doubt it....

[url=http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/eyewitnessaccountsofwtc7fires

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

[/url]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.


Hmmm. What was that that Silverstein said? Oh, yeah, "I remember getting a call from the fire chief.....blah, blah and they decided to pull it, and we wathced the building fall." So, a direct contradiction to what Silverstein said? Who's lying? Who's covering who's ass? Thanks for this CO. Even though you present it as a "debunk" to the CT's, in all actuality, it just gives us more ammo.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Born in 1948 makes him 59 years old with quite a few years ahead of him and eyes for a possible higher office (maybe president-not-to-be Guliani's FEMA director?)

In other words, no reason for him to stick his neck out for anything other than reiterating the official stories, even attempting to clear Silvermouth's slip up... Even if he had nothing to do with any conspiracies.

As unbeliavable as it would still be, it'd be one thing if they would say, "Well, we saw it was going to collapse, so we called experts to wire the place up to bring it down before it would do so on its own and damage surrounding buildings... It would maybe provide a reasonable explanation for the THIRD miraculous "collapse to own footprint of a steel skyscraper" ever.

But they don't even bother to go there... All they keep saying is "oops, it collapsed".

I am not saying that it is so, but let's assume ALL our scientists have been shut off, murdered, coherced, eliminated, etc. But, where the hell are the scientists of the rest of the world??? Is there no one out there, or better yet, is there no reputable institution out there in the world to shed some credible light (and please don't send me the links for the dutch CD guy and the couple of professors here... I've seen them all and obviously they are not cutting it)

F the theories!!! Time for real science to find out the TRUTH.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by may_be_true
F the theories!!! Time for real science to find out the TRUTH.


Since 99.9% of the evidence was carted away under the tightest security, construction documents under lock and key, and professors loosing their jobs for speaking out, how are we to come up with facts? Theories are all we can do.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


The reasons are as follows:
1 - Although prior to that day high-rise structures had never collapsed, The collapse of WTC 1 & 2 showed that certain high-rise structures subjected to damage from impact and from fire will collapse.
2. The collapse of WTC 1 damaged portions of the lower floors of WTC 7.
3. WTC 7, we knew, was built on a small number of large columns providing an open Atrium on the lower levels.
4. numerous fires on many floors of WTC 7 burned without sufficient water supply to attack them.

Hmmmm, those are the reasons he himself gave.

I'm not debating anything but what my good friend the OP posted. I already agreed I would have made the same call and gave my reason. The guy doesent mention his training at all as a reason and yet you defend his training but don't directly state it was a reason to the decision.

But then when you look at the image I posted, it directly contradicts his statement.




[edit on 23-9-2007 by jprophet420]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:43 PM
link   


Since 99.9% of the evidence was carted away under the tightest security, construction documents under lock and key, and professors loosing their jobs for speaking out.....


Well yes, they have done all that... But between a gazillion photos and videos, technical, architectural data, physics, chemistry, etc. there is plenty of bones to pick on.

We can determine stuff that happens light years away from minimal evidence like the red shift, we can determine the age of minerals or fossils that are millions of years old, we can calculate the exact trajectory of a meteor, computer models successfully replicate extremely complex explosions, material behaviors...

I say for the willing and able, the 0.01% is plenty.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 11:32 PM
link   
I am not going to argue whether it was a controlled demo or not.

I DO take issue with anyone thinking a fire chief was in on any cover up.

When the other buildings collapsed and WTC7 was out of control, he had better evacuate the fireground! That is what chiefs do...they make sure the people on the fireground are safe.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join