9/11 -- The Firefighter tapes
Angie begins with a review of David Ray Griffin's speech in NYC in late 2005.
Okay, I saw Griffin speak on Saturday. I don't know if he's read all
503 of the oral interviews that were put up on the New York Times'
website, but during his lecture, he indicated that "at least 25"
firefighters knew in advance that WTC7 would collapse, and that in
fact "a collapse zone was established" in advance and people were told
to stand "5 blocks away" for safety reasons & that the 'expectation'
of the collapse of WTC7 was communicated 4-5 hours in advance. He
also read from the quote from Fellini which Mitsy found (copied below
& Rob, by the way, you know Mitsy - she's the mother of our youngest
911 Meetup member) as well as from another fire chief who spoke about
heavy fire on many floors in WTC7, and Griffin found it peculiar that
the 3-4 story gap described by Fellini & the fires by the other chief
were never captured on film, and that the fires alleged to be on the
south side of WTC7 couldn't have been that big or they would have
swept through and been visible on the northside or blown out windows,
etc., and that in any event, the nature of the collapse & it's speed,
etc., demonstrated that it was intentionally demolished.
911 Truth Movement Musings (Watching the Watchers)
Frank Fellini -" The major concern at that time at that
particular location 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.
So for the next five or six hours we kept
firefighters from working anywhere near that building, which
included the whole north side of the World Trade Center
complex. Eventually around 5:00 or a little after, building
number seven came down.
We just started organizing things on the north
side of the north foot bridge to remove apparatus that was
moveable and recover the bodies that we could locate and
remove -- in the meantime the job was sectored with Chiefs Blaich,
and Haring, having different sectors of the World Trade
Center complex. Blaich, Hayden and Visconti were all working
south in the north tower, the north bridge. Chief Haring was
by City Hall Park on the Church Street side of the
At some point in the afternoon prior to number
seven coming down, Chief Nigro, Chief Callan, Chief
Cruthers, Chief Meyers, Chief Butler and I had a meeting in
the auditorium of the high school that was located around
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "angiesept11"
> I also posted the following at portland indymedia where the format
> makes for easier reading:
> New 9/11 stuff & Advance Knowledge of 3 Bldg. Collapses
> Newly released transcripts of firefighters interviewed after 9/11
> reveal advance knowledge of twin towers' and WTC7 collapses with a
> little speculation about what this could mean. Also a discussion on
> what else was & is going to be released and how that info is being
> redacted first.
> >>>>>"Dr. Griffin will be speaking about the recently-released
> archives of police, firefighter and citizen responses on 9/11/2001
> (this Thursday in Connecticut and on 10/15 in NYC). According to Dr.
> Griffin and others, those archives strengthen the already-formidable
> case that the Twin Towers and WTC Building 7 were destroyed in
> controlled demolitions with explosives."
> Can't seem to post this comment in response to boston indymedia page
> above, so I put it here.
> This is a very interesting topic, this recently released information,
> and I haven't seen any analysis of it yet. Below I've copied some
> tidbits from it that demonstrate that there was advance knowledge that
> the twin towers and WTC Building 7 would collapse. With the twin
> towers, the newly released material provides further information
> concerning an unidentified guy from the Office of Emergency Management
> knowing that both towers would collapse before either of them did.
> With WTC7, you even had groups of firefighter and other personnel
> standing around (a sufficient distance away) WAITING for a couple of
> hours for it to collapse, as they were directed to do, so that they
> could help out afterwards.
> Since there's never been a credible scientific explanation of these 3
> building collapses that jives with the official story - as the fires
> and/or plane hits should not have been anything close to sufficient to
> bring these buildings down (see all the internet research indicating
> extent and estimated temperature of fires and the temperature needed
> to weaken steel, the free-fall speed of the collapses, etc., etc.),
> this is further evidence of their intentional demolition by explosion
> or similar means with some people in the know before it happened. And
> it is interesting to examine too how this material was dealt with by
> the Kean Commission's 9/11 report. How could anyone know in advance
> that these buildings would collapse when there was no scientific
> reason, no previous history of building collapses under similar
> circumstances, and when the buildings were so constructed to withstand
> collapsing under such circumstances - unless they had inside info
> about the PLANNED DEMOLITIONS? Answer: they couldn't.
> All of the recently released information is located here:
> link to graphics8.nytimes.com
> and includes oral histories from firefighters and other personnel
> interviewed by the Fire Department beginning a few weeks after the
> attacks through 2/02. Although the New York Times indicated in August
> on the day the new stuff was released that they were making it all
> public - some 500 firefighter and other personnel interview
> statements, that wasn't previously true. Previously, I counted only 80
> interview statements up on their website. They had a different link
> for it back on August 12th: ( link to www.nytimes.com ) which is still
> a working link -although it does NOT provide all the 503 statements
> even when you refresh the page, so don't be fooled like I was. Use the
> new link that I just discovered tonight which does contain some 500
> odd statements. The link is above, the one with the word "full"
> contained in its url towards the end. The Kean Commission report also
> mentioned 500 fire department interview transcripts, and they also
> indicated in footnote 163 of Chapter 9 that the Kean Commission
> interviewed 100 such personnel themselves, although any transcripts of
> same have not been released by the Commission.
> Note that although the Times' webpage which provides transcripts of
> these oral histories misleadingly indicates that the
> "[t]he oral histories of dispatch transmissions are transcribed
> verbatim. They have not been edited to omit coarse language"
> the oral histories have, in fact, been edited to delete "portions that
> can be shown likely to cause serious pain or embarrassment to an
> interviewee". That phrase is from the New York Court of Appeal's
> decision which ruled in March on what should and
> should not be released out of all the info the New York Times was
> seeking in its lawsuit which it brought after the City and Fire Dept.
> refused disclosure under the Freedom of Information law. The New York
> Times admitted as much when it reported on the histories' release on
> 8/12/05 by indicating that "The Court of Appeals allowed the oral
> histories to be edited under a limited set of circumstances" although
> the Times didn't mention therein what those limited set of
> circumstances were.
> link to www.nytimes.com
> Pursuant to the Court's decision (here: link to www.nycourts.gov )
> those "limited set of circumstances" refers to the 'embarrassing'
> stuff, as quoted above.
> Also to be noted, so you can see the extent of the farce that is the
> information the public is denied access to with respect to 9/11 is
> that the New York Court of Appeals will permit only the release of one
> side of the telephone calls made to 911 on 9/11: the 911 operators'
> side, not the side of the people who called 911 (except for calls to
> 911 involving 8 victims whose family members were party to the
> lawsuit.) So, we don't get to hear what people reported to the 911
> operators, only the operators' responses. This is a special privacy
> rule the Court came up with just for Sept. 11th, as traditionally
> there is no expectation of privacy under the law when one calls 911.
> And with respect to "interagency communications or dispatch calls"
> made on 9/11, the Court will only permit "facts" from same to be
> revealed, not "opinions". In other words, to give just a quick &
> sloppy example, if in a dispatch call or recorded interagency
> communication, one firefighter chief said to another that "My name is
> John Smith and the time now is X. I heard what sounded like explosions
> in the basement and I think it was bombs that took down that tower",
> the only portion of such communication that is not opinion, "My name
> is John Smith and the time is X" would be released, not the rest which
> would be considered an opinion. There are audio dispatch tapes on the
> Times' website above. Haven't listened to hardly any of them. And on
> 8/12/05, the New York Times reported that "[o]ther records, including
> tapes of 911 operators, are being assembled and are not yet ready for
> release, city officials said" (link above).
> Anyway, back to the advance knowledge of the collapse of the towers
> and WTC #7. I read only a very few of the oral histories (from the
> Times' original link, which was to only about 80 of them) and happened
> to come across the following excerpts which reveal this advance
> knowledge. Links to same are also included & a few times I inserted my
> own comment in parenthesis, identified as such with my name - Angie.
> After the excerpts, I'll just mention how the Kean Commission report
> dealt with this material, of advance knowledge of the 3 building
> collapses and leave others to speculate on what it means.
> Excerpts from the recently released oral histories:
> "because I was getting hungry. We were eating oatmeal cookies and
> watered-down Gatorade from the Salvation Army and the Red Cross. They
> were great. They had plenty of food. But we were getting hungry.
> We walked back. We didn't do any
> further because building number seven was coming down. That was
> another problem, to wait for building seven to come down, because that
> was unsecure. It was about 5:30 that building came down."
> link to graphics8.nytimes.com
> FIREFIGHTER SCOTT HOLOWACH
> link to graphics8.nytimes.com
> > PDF
> A. Yes, Stuyvesant High School, until they figured out, I guess, there
> was no gas leak or no secondary bomb. Or no bomb. I guess they put the
> PD in there to search it. They moved us back south. We ended up back
> up on Vesey Street and West Street and just hanging out until tower 7
> came down.
> After tower 7 came down, we went right to work over at tower 7 to put
> the fires out. That's where we stayed until we were relieved.
> Q. Did you see a lot of civilians coming out towards you away by the
> water on West Street?
> A. There wasn't much civilians at the water, no, no.
> LIEUTENANT WILLIAM RYAN
> link to graphics8.nytimes.com
> > PDF
> I remember Chief Hayden saying to me, "We have a six-story building
> over there, a seven-story building, fully involved." At that time he
> said, "7 has got fire on several floors." He said, "We've got a
> ten-story over there, another ten-story over there, a six-story over
> there, a 13-story over there." He just looked at me and said, "Fuck
> 'em all. Let 'em burn."
> He said, "Just tell the guys to keep looking for guys.
> Just keep looking for the brothers. We've got people trapped. We've
> got to get them out."
> . . .
> Then we found out, I guess around 3:00
> o'clock, that they thought 7 was going to collapse.
> So, of course, we've got guys all in this pile over here and the main
> concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and
> a half, two hours to get everybody out of there.
> Q. Initially when you were there, you had said you heard a few Maydays?
> A. Oh, yes. We had Maydays like crazy.
> Q. You were getting radio transmissions?
> A. There were people talking. The guys I've talked to that were with
> us heard voices and were shouting to people. We had heard pass alarms,
> but then we didn't hear voices, no more pass alarms. The heat . . .
> So it took us a while and we ended up backing everybody out, and
> that's when 7 collapsed. Then, basically, after 7 collapsed, I went
> over and told the Chief that -- by then they had companies with
> handie-talkies, masks. You've got to remember, the first 200 guys went
> in there with no handie-talkies, no masks, some of them with bunker
> gear, some without. A lot of guys I recognized. I'm on the job 23
> years, so I know a lot of guys, and they were just coming up to me. It
> was good to see everybody was there trying to do something.
> Basically, we fell back for 7 to collapse, and then we waited a while
> and it got a lot more organized, I would guess. By then there was some
> heavy equipment showing up and the Chiefs took over, and I basically
> kind of slipped away from the Chiefs because I didn't want to be doing
> what I was doing anymore. I kind of felt stuck there.
> . . .
> position over here. I went in there to take a leak and I just looked
> around. I guess when we fell back for 7 to collapse I called her. I
> found a phone that worked, a landline, and I got through to her. I
> didn't know the Pentagon got hit. I didn't know. She started telling
> me all that shit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------> > ------------------------
> FIREFIGHTER FRANK SWEENEY
> link to graphics8.nytimes.com
> > PDF
> Now the Fire Department is trying to gather the people and make some
> kind of organization out of it and getting companies together at that
> Once they got us back together and
> organized somewhat, they sent us back down to Vesey, where we stood
> and waited for Seven World Trade Center to come down.
> A different oral history:
> "Again, times are a little fuzzy initially for
> me. A few minutes later, John (not further identified except most
> likely from OEM - Angie)
> came to me and said you need to go find Chief Ganci and relay the
> following message: that the buildings have been compromised, we
> need to evacuate, they're going to collapse. I said
> okay. I went down Vesey Street towards West.
> Q. You were by yourself?
> A. I was by myself, me and my helmet and my
> radio. I got to the corner of Vesey and West. I found
> some EMS vehicles. I think I saw Chief Gombo there.
> I'm not really sure. I mentioned to the EMS people
> there, again, not knowing who they were, I said you
> need to get away from here, the building might
> collapse, we need to leave this spot.
> As I was walking towards the Fire command
> post, I found Steve Mosiello. I said, Steve, where's
> the boss? I have to give him a message. He said,
> well, what's the message? I said the buildings are
> going to collapse; we need to evac everybody out. With
> a very confused look he said who told you that? I said
> I was just with John at OEM. OEM says the buildings
> are going to collapse; we need to get out.
> He escorted me over to Chief Ganci. He said,
> hey, Pete, we got a message that the buildings are
> going to collapse. His reply was who the fuck told you
> that? Then Steve brought me in and with Chief Ganci,
> Commissioner Feehan, Steve, I believe Chief Turi was
> initially there, I said, listen, I was just at OEM.
> The message I was given was that the buildings are
> going to collapse; we need to get our people out. At
> that moment, this thunderous, rolling roar came down
> and that's when the building came down, the first tower
> came down.
> . . .
> very fine but heavy dust that was in the air.
> Once I got out of the building, maybe ten
> minutes from there, that unforgettable rolling started.
> Q. The same sound you heard earlier?
> A. The same sound I heard earlier.
> Q. Where were you at this point?
> A. I was on West and Vesey, probably in the
> middle of the intersection, trying to find people that
> I knew. At this point I didn't know where John was,
> where Abdo was. I don't know what happened to No. 7.
> I knew the building was coming down. I watched it come
> down on us, but I don't know where anybody else is.
> As that roar was happening on the second time
> around, I was running down Vesey Street towards the
> water with a few thoughts in my head.
> A. There was a building right there on the
> corner. Maybe 15, 20 feet off the corner, there was an
> entrance into a building, and that's where -- it was
> mostly glass windows and we were concerned that the
> glass was going to implode.
> Q. Did that face the river?
> A. It faced the river and that was protection in
> my view.
> Q. About a three-block distance?
> A. It's actually one city block, but still that . . ."
> link to graphics8.nytimes.com
> link to graphics8.nytimes.com
> John Perrugia interview:
> Q. What is your rank and title?
> A. EMS Division Chief, in charge
> the Chief of Department's office.
> (This is the "John" that sent Zarrillo with the message about the
> inpending collapses. But first he mentions in his interview why WTC7
> was evacuated, not because of any fear for the buildings' structural
> integrity due to fires or 2 airplane attacks but because of a report
> of a 3rd hijacked plane: - Angie)
> "I reached 7 World Trade Center. We walked
> into the lobby and we were going up the escalators to
> the main level. I checked in at the security desk. As
> we reached the top of the escalators, there were lots
> of people running down the escalator on the promenade.
> I spoke to one of the Deputy Directors and as I was
> speaking with him, I believe it was Deputy Director
> Rotanz (not on list of those statementized - Angie), who is a Fire
> Department Captain on detail over there, Captain Nahmod and EMT
> Zarrillo approached as well. They had indicated that the building was
> being evacuated.
> I questioned as to what the nature of the
> evacuation was. I was told that it was not because of
> what was occurring across the street. No one feared
> that the building was in any danger as a result of two
> airplane attacks and subsequent fires, but that there
> were reports of a third plane that had been hijacked.
> It was unidentified, the location, and they thought it
> may be coming in for an additional strike. Therefore,
> they were evacuating the building.
> We proceeded down to the lobby where the
> various agency representatives were present. We
> collectively started to set up in the lobby and try to
> think of strategies to where we could move the
> inter-agency cooperation effort."
> And now to advance notice that towers would collapse:
> "point I went back into the building. I was in a
> discussion with Mr. Rotanz [again, not on the list of people
> statementized - Angie] and I believe it was a
> representative from the Department of Buildings, but
> I'm not sure. Some engineer type person, and several
> of us were huddled talking in the lobby and it was
> brought to my attention, it was believed that the
> structural damage that was suffered to the towers was
> quite significant and they were very confident that the
> building's stability was compromised and they felt that
> the north tower was in danger of a near imminent
> I grabbed EMT Zarrillo, I advised him of that
> information. I told him he was to proceed immediately
> to the command post where Chief Ganci was located.
> Told him where it was across the street from number 1
> World Trade Center. I told him "You see Chief Ganci
> and Chief Ganci only. Provide him with the information
> that the building integrity is severely compromised and
> they believe the building is in danger of imminent
> collapse." So, he left off in that direction.
> Q. They felt that just the one building or both
> of them?
> A. The information we got at that time was that
> they felt both buildings were significantly damaged,
> but they felt that the north tower, which was the first
> one to be struck, was going to be in imminent danger of
> collapse. Looking up at it, you could see that, you
> could see through the smoke or whatever, that there was
> significant structural damage to the exterior of the
> building. Very noticeable. Now you know, again, this
> is not a scene where the thought of both buildings
> collapsing ever entered into my mind.
> I was there in 1993, 14 minutes after the
> bomb went off. I operated some 16 hours at the
> building and with all the post-incident critiques and
> debriefings with various agencies. We were always told
> by everyone, the experts, that these buildings could
> withstand direct hits from airplanes. That's the way
> they were designed. They went through all of this
> architectural stuff, way beyond the scope of my
> It was hit by an airplane. That's okay.
> It's made to be hit by an airplane. I mean I think
> everyone may have believed that. We were all told
> years ago it was made to be hit by an airplane.
> Some amount of time passed by, probably not
> long, again, I wasn't checking my watch. Actually we
> were just really disgusted, maybe we were going to move
> what we were going to do and how we were going to try
> to coordinate. Things were hectic. We didn't have the
> tools that we normally have to communicate with our
> agency, you know, cellular phones were not working
> properly, radio was very difficult to get through. I
> work for the Chief of the Department, I don't have a
> fire ground radio, so I had no direct communications
> with my boss at that time, which is one of the reasons
> I needed to send EMT Zarrillo with that message, which
> I felt was very significant, to the command post.
> Just moments before the south tower collapsed
> and, you know, when it happened we didn't know it was
> the south tower. We thought it was the north tower.
> There was a reporter of some sort, female with blond
> hair and her cameraman, an oriental fellow. They were
> setting up outside 7 World Trade Center, just east of
> the pedestrian bridge. I told them it would probably
> be better off to be set up under the bridge. At least
> it was protected. I was just about to enter a dialogue
> with her when I heard a sound I never heard before. I
> looked up and saw this huge cloud. I told him run. I
> grabbed the female, I threw her through the revolving
> . . . (omitting portion of statement until 2nd collapse - Angie)
> on Vesey and West. I looked up, I saw the north tower
> fully involved. I saw number 6 World Trade Center
> fully involved with fire. I started to make my way to
> the command post when I heard that horrible sound
> again, you know, that whining screeching jet engine.
> I looked up and at that point I knew the
> north tower was coming down. I made an immediate about
> face and I started to run as quick as I can."
> Now think about the ramifications of how and why the cagey Kean
> Commission dealt with this material as they did. They indicated they
> reviewed the 500 oral histories (footnote 163 on p. 550), and mention
> advance knowledge of the twin towers' collapse in this manner:
> "They also received advice from senior FDNY chiefs that while the
> building might eventually suffer a partial collapse on upper floors,
> such structural failure was not imminent. No one anticipated the
> possibility of a total collapse." Page 290 of Kean Commission Report,
> & something similar on p. 302.
> "At about 9:57, an EMS paramedic approached the FDNY Chief of
> Department and advised that an engineer in front of 7 WTC had just
> remarked that the Twin Towers in fact were in imminent danger of a
> total collapse." P. 302
> "Prior to 9:59, no NYPD helicopter pilot predicted that either tower
> would collapse". P. 304
> "Though almost no one at 9:50 on September 11 was contemplating an
> imminent total collapse of the Twin Towers, many first responders and
> civilians were contemplating the possibility of imminent additional
> terrorist attacks . . . " p. 320
> "Contrary to a widely held misperception, no NYPD helicopter predicted
> the fall of either tower before the South Tower collapsed" p. 321
> About advance knowledge that WTC7 would collapse, the Kean Commission
> report is completely silent. In fact, it doesn't mention the collapse
> of WTC7 at all. And the FEMA report concedes it doesn't have a good
> theory as to what caused WTC7 to fall. Prepare for the possibility of
> the exposure of the intentional demolition of WTC7 without it being
> connected with the towers or any 9/11 inside job plot, perhaps the
> exploitation of the tragedy that day wrought by the terrorists (a
> property crime, insurance fraud scam), or explained away in some other
> non 9/11-inside job manner as the release of these oral histories
> demonstrate that they aren't hiding the fact that they knew WTC7 would
> come down well before it did.
> 911 Truth Movement Musings (Watching the Watchers)
> homepage: http://www.Angieon911.com