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.
Originally posted by REMISNE
Well thats why i had e-mailed contractors and companies that were there at ground zero to get some answers.
Too bad you and others to not care enough about the truth to e-mail people.
Originally posted by REMISNE
Gee, you cannot tell the difference between fires burning out and fires being out?
There were still some fire. I mean that what Chief Hayden's stated his worry was.
Originally posted by REMISNE
Well if you knew more about what was going on that day would you know that they were running out of water to fight fires.
Originally posted by gavron
9 years later, and they haven't replied to your email? You might want to change ISPs
Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Oh please, you've pointed out before that they were stringing lines from the fireboats.
Originally posted by REMISNE
Yes, and then there is a video of hard hat workers inside that collaspe zone stating the building is comming down now, or it will blow up.
Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Or had knowledge of them being planted?
Originally posted by REMISNE
Yes they have replied and i have shown you the reply. Do not be dishonest because i am sure i can still show the post to you.
Originally posted by REMISNE
Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Oh please, you've pointed out before that they were stringing lines from the fireboats.
Yes but that was not enough.
Originally posted by REMISNE
Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Or had knowledge of them being planted?
GEE, maybe it was when they stated "THE BUILDING IS GOING TO BLOW UP."
Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Yes, but by stringing lines from the fireboats, are they improving the water supply, or not.
Your statement is that they were running out of water. But by acknowledging that they were stringing out new lines, you have now shot yourself in the foot by using this as a point of argument.
So fires that could spread to other buildings...those had to be quite large, don't you think?
Originally posted by weedwhacker
One hand, "Building shouldn't collapse, fires too small."
Other hand, "Building had to be demo'd because fires too big, might jump to nearby buildings."....
Originally posted by REMISNE
Whats so hard to understand about Chief Haydens statement that he was worried about fire jumping to other buildings because they were running out of water?
Originally posted by gavron
...but you also said the fires were burning out. Which is it? The fires were growing and out of control, requiring the building be demo'd, or they were burning out?
Originally posted by REMISNE
Gee. you do understand that fire is still fire?
Originally posted by gavron
Well, you seem to be confused about this. One one hand you say the fires were burning out, then you say they were large enough to spread to other structures (which would mean they were NOT burning out).
Originally posted by REMISNE
No, i am not confused, i am making and proving basic points of fact.
I beleive its you who is confues about the fact that fire can jump to building (no matter the size) and they were running out of water.