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.

 

First Responder States CD Countdown before WTC 7 Collapsed

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


OK let me get the details straight

The decision to clear a collapse zone around the building was made at approximately 2PM.
WTC7 was about 186m tall and a standard collapse zone is a radius of 1.5 x the building height = about 280m (~920') all around. That radius would include quite a few multi-story buildings with people possibly still inside them so firemen would need to check every floor, every room of all affected buildings to ensure the zone was cleared, negotiating with building fire wardens and floor wardens along the way if they existed. It wouldn't be only firemen being pulled back and some people almost need to be dragged forcibly which takes an insane amount of time.

About 1.5 hours after the decision to clear the area the collapse zone was declared clear of all persons and about 1.5 hours after that the building collapsed at approx 5PM. The chief made an excellent call on that one I think.

Where does the 'pull it' thing fit into that timescale - was it at about 2PM or 3:30PM?




posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
Where does the 'pull it' thing fit into that timescale - was it at about 2PM or 3:30PM?


Well since we have the statement from Chief Nigro that he evacuated the firemen from the buidling early in the day WITHOUT talking to anyone we know the phone call to Silverstein was made AFTER the firemen were evacuated. So the PULL IT statement could not have meant to pull out the firemen since they were already out of the building.

The phone call had to be around 3:30 PM according to the fire chiefs timelines.

Anyone with Emergency Incident Command trianing or experience would also know that the only reason for the fire commander to call Silverstein was to inform him that they could not save the buildingSince Silverstein had no authority over anything that was going on.

The fire commander along with all in incident command then decided to PULL the building due to the fact that tey were worried about more damage and more fires if the buidling fell on its on according to Chief Haydens statements.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 08:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Well since we have the statement from Chief Nigro that he evacuated the firemen from the buidling early in the day WITHOUT talking to anyone we know the phone call to Silverstein was made AFTER the firemen were evacuated. So the PULL IT statement could not have meant to pull out the firemen since they were already out of the building.

The phone call had to be around 3:30 PM according to the fire chiefs timelines.


So the 3:30 time for the statement isn't exact?

I'm sure they had evacuated WTC7 well before that but all buildings in an 1800' diameter circle around WTC7 had to be evacuated as well and it appears firemen and police were involved in that evacuation. He could still have been referring to pulling those searchers out of the declared collapse zone, being assured that all citizens had been directed out of there already by the searchers reporting back to him. 1.5 hours to clear such an area in NYC is a pretty good effort by those involved.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
He could still have been referring to pulling those searchers out of the declared collapse zone, being assured that all citizens had been directed out of there already by the searchers reporting back to him.


How many times does it have to be stated and proven that Silverstein had no authority to tell the fire commander what to do with his men ?

I wil state it again. The only reason for the fire commander to call Silverstien was to tell him that they could not save the building.

Also the facts all conclude that all first responders were away from the buidlings collapse zone well before the building was brought down.



[edit on 14-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 

Correct. The fireman had left the building 90 minutes before the collapse. That is "well before", as you have stated.

That insured everyone was away from the building when it succumbed to the fire damage.

And no, it was not "brought down" by explosives or thermite cutters. Can you give an example where a FIRE DEPT brought down a burning 20+ story building using explosives or thermite cutters? One example, please.

I didnt think so.



posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
That insured everyone was away from the building when it succumbed to the fire damage.


Too bad i have already shown several steel buildings with longer fires and more structural damage then building 7 and DID NOT collapse. No steel building has ever collapsed from fire no matter how severe.

You must not have seen the video of the workers coming out of the saftey zone from buidling 7 stating that the buidling is coming down?

I guess you do not do research or you would have found that fire marshalls and fire chiefs do have authority to demo a building.

Also if there was so much damage to one side as the official story states the buidling would have collasped to that side and not straight down starting in the middle as the videos all show.



posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 



Too bad i have already shown several steel buildings with longer fires and more structural damage then building 7 and DID NOT collapse. No steel building has ever collapsed from fire no matter how severe.


If no steel building has ever collapsed from fire no matter how severe, then why did the fire dept have to "pull it" (as you say)? There would be no need to "pull it". They could just let it burn out.



You must not have seen the video of the workers coming out of the saftey zone from buidling 7 stating that the buidling is coming down?


Yes, everyone has seen videos of workers leaving the WTC7 area. This is because they were pulling the people out of the area, because the building was going to collapse due to the severe damage.



I guess you do not do research or you would have found that fire marshalls and fire chiefs do have authority to demo a building.


I asked for you to show us an example of where the fire dept has demo'd a 20+ story building due to being unable to fight the fires. You have not, which leads us to believe they never have done that. Please, ULTIMA1, show us just one 20+ story building where the fire dept has used explosives or thermite cutters to bring down a still burning building.



Also if there was so much damage to one side as the official story states the buidling would have collasped to that side and not straight down starting in the middle as the videos all show.


If you bothered to do any research on the construction of the WTC7 building, you would know why it collapsed like it did. Perhaps you should read up on its design, then re-read your question. I think you will see that your question is quite silly and immature.



posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
If no steel building has ever collapsed from fire no matter how severe, then why did the fire dept have to "pull it" (as you say)? There would be no need to "pull it". They could just let it burn out.


Please read the quotes from Chief Hayden about the possible fire jumping to other buildings and causing more damage if it collapsed on its own.


Yes, everyone has seen videos of workers leaving the WTC7 area. This is because they were pulling the people out of the area, because the building was going to collapse due to the severe damage.


What were the workers doing in the safety zone that had started to be evacuated earlier in the day?


If you bothered to do any research on the construction of the WTC7 building, you would know why it collapsed like it did.


Please explain then why all the beleivere like you keep making such a big deal of the damage done to the side to explain why the buidling collapsed?

Funny how you beleivers keep changing your story about how the building collapsed. Speaking of being immature, that has to be the most immature thing about believers.



posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 



Please read the quotes from Chief Hayden about the possible fire jumping to other buildings and causing more damage if it collapsed on its own.


So where is your example of ANY fire dept in ANY country using explosives or thermite cutters to bring down a burning 20+ story building?

I think you will find that has never happened, EVER. The idea of that is juvenile.


Please explain then why all the beleivere like you keep making such a big deal of the damage done to the side to explain why the buidling collapsed?


Why make a big deal out of the planes flying into the WTC towers then? I mean, if you are going to ignore something simple like a 20 story gash caused by debris, then why include anything?



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 12:05 AM
link   
I asked for you to show us an example of where the fire dept has demo'd a 20+ story building due to being unable to fight the fires. You have not, which leads us to believe they never have done that. Please, ULTIMA1, show us just one 20+ story building where the fire dept has used explosives or thermite cutters to bring down a still burning building.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


I asked for you to show us an example of where the fire dept has demo'd a 20+ story building due to being unable to fight the fires. You have not, which leads us to believe they never have done that. Please, ULTIMA1, show us just one 20+ story building where the fire dept has used explosives or thermite cutters to bring down a still burning building.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
I asked for you to show us an example of where the fire dept has demo'd a 20+ story building due to being unable to fight the fires. You have not, which leads us to believe they never have done that.


Sure, right after you show me a steel buidling in the last 20 years in the US that has collapsed from fire. Since you claim is the buidling collapsed from fire.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


I don't recall ever hearing of a fire dept going into a burning building, and setting up charges or using thermite cutters to bring it down. If so, it would be the 1st time i've heard of them doing that.
Also, wouldn't the firemen be praised for doing that then? Risking their lives to go into a burning building, and causing it to come down in a controlled fashion, with such short notice? Why would they need to cover anything like that up?



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
Also, wouldn't the firemen be praised for doing that then? Risking their lives to go into a burning building, and causing it to come down in a controlled fashion, with such short notice? Why would they need to cover anything like that up?


Well for 1 we do not know it was firemen that went in the building it could have been demo crews.

Also from all the photos of buidling 7 there can be no fire seen on the lower floors.

As stated by the EPA that recovered all the fuel from the ground floot tanks there was probably no fire on the ground floor.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Well for 1 we do not know it was firemen that went in the building it could have been demo crews.


I find that very interesting. Do you have examples of either fireman or demo crews bringing down buildings with explosives or thermite cutters while the building was on fire? I'd like to see how they do that, and what they use to do that.



Also from all the photos of buidling 7 there can be no fire seen on the lower floors.

As stated by the EPA that recovered all the fuel from the ground floot tanks there was probably no fire on the ground floor.


With no fires in the lower levels then, where were the fires the chief was concerned that would jump buildings?

Did the fire dept or demo teams then put charges on only the lower floors?



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
Did the fire dept or demo teams then put charges on only the lower floors?


With the design of the building 7 you only needed to cut beams on the lower floors to bring it down. The shape the building was in it would not have taken much to bring it down.

By the way you do know that fire rescue teams do have the knowledge and equipment to cut beams for rescue?



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Sounds logical that fireman would have knowledge to cut into buildings, cars, etc to rescue people. Sure I understand that.

However, I've been searching, and can find no examples of where a 20+ story building was brought down while there was still a fire raging in it. Granted, maybe not on some of the lower floors, but a fire severe enough that the fire chief feared it would jump buildings.

Can you show me any examples of this, please?



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
However, I've been searching, and can find no examples of where a 20+ story building was brought down while there was still a fire raging in it.


But you would agree that Fire Marshalls and Fire Chiefs do have the authority to demo a buidling, specailly in a emergency?



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

But you would agree that Fire Marshalls and Fire Chiefs do have the authority to demo a buidling, specailly in a emergency?


I cannot agree to that, since it has never happened before. At least I show no previous events that have required either the fire dept or a demo team to be sent into a still burining 20+ story building to "bring it down".

Can you show me any case where that has happened? Maybe I'm not doing proper research to find that. Trying to find that data, but it doesnt seem to exist.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
Can you show me any case where that has happened? Maybe I'm not doing proper research to find that. Trying to find that data, but it doesnt seem to exist.


Strange that you cannot find the regualation that allows fire marshalls and fire chiefs to demo a building.

Yo also talk like the whole buidling was an inferno when photos show some fire coming from only a few floors.

[edit on 17-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join