It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Memos: Firefighter refused call to Tucson shooting

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 07:48 AM
Is this what we are headed for? Will our public service employees determine which calls they will respond to, based upon political affiliations?

The coward retired rather that face discipline. He should be stripped of all benefits, imo.

TUCSON, Ariz. – A veteran firefighter refused to respond to last month's deadly shooting spree that left Rep. Gabrielle Giffords wounded because he had different political views than his colleagues and "did not want to be part of it," according to internal city memos.

Mark Ekstrum's insubordination may have delayed his unit's response because firefighters had to stop at another station to pick up a replacement for him, the Arizona Daily Star reported.

While the crew was not among the first called to the supermarket where six people were killed and 13 others wounded, a memo from Ekstrum's supervisor said his actions caused "confusion and delay" during the emergency.

Ekstrum's team, which is specially trained to handle large medical emergencies, was dispatched to assist 90 minutes after the Jan. 8 shooting.

edit on 19-2-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 08:20 AM
I'm sorry, but something about this doesn't sit right with me. I'm not buying the whole "I was too distraught" to respond bit. I am still of the mindset that there is a conspiracy linked with this whole shooting and IMO this firefighter needs to be questioned. From the reports his demeanor on the day of the shooting was a bit odd.

This guy was a 20+ year veteran, I am sure he has seen worse.

And I have to agree with you that he should be stripped of all benefits.

posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 08:28 AM
reply to post by IamAbeliever

Yeah, something about this is weird to me, too.

Over at Free Republic, they are claiming the guy is a Democrat, but I cannot find any confirmation on that. As if it matters, eh?

posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 08:53 AM
reply to post by mishigas

Capt. Ben Williams wrote in a report that when Ekstrum first said he would not go on the call, "he mentioned something about `political bantering' and he did not want to be part of it."

People are dead and dying. You are a firefighter and part of a unit specially trained to handle large emergencies, and you don't want to respond becaue you don't want to be part of the "political bantering"? WTF kind of excuse is that?

This guy knows something.

posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 10:15 AM
Id say he was thinking of the repercussions.
The first responders to 9/11 or Oklahoma must have been subjected to a lot of FBI police, and other agency pressures and investigations as well as having to give testimony etc.
Sure he may know something, but probably didnt want to have his private life under scrutiny by so many different police agencies, as well as having to deal with a very high profile medical mergency that could have all kinds of repercussions for some time to come.
Id like to hear a better detailed account of his reasoning.....
Before ripping his pension off and castigating him to pieces...........

posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 10:20 AM
Fire him and strip him of his pension because you cannot pick and choose what calls you respond to as well as cannot pick and choose when you reply.

If you wear the uniform and do not respond when called you are to be fired, plain and simple.

It could be determined that by the station wasting time on him cost people their lives.

In an unrelated topic there was this incident in Jersey City, NJ around 2006 that an emergency situation was presented to a shift of a local firehouse and as a direct result of inaction of the shift someone turned up dead and had the entire 2nd shift fired.
edit on 20-2-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

top topics

log in