Posted: Fri Oct 27, 2006 3:38 pm Post subject: How many more coincidences?
Quote:
Finding 2.25:
The fire alarm system that was monitoring WTC 7 sent
to the monitoring company only one signal (at 10:00:52 a.m. shortly
after the collapse of WTC 2) indicating a fire condition in the
building on September 11, 2001. This signal did not contain any specific
information about the location of the fire within the building.
[The alarm had been set to “test” mode due to maintenance work] http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/chapter1.pdf (pg28)
This really is getting rather silly isn't it? _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
A nother nail in a coffin which will never be oppened. _________________ "Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our mind..." Bod Marley
Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 5:34 pm Post subject: Re: How many more coincidences?
Patrick Brown wrote:
Quote:
Finding 2.25:
The fire alarm system that was monitoring WTC 7 sent
to the monitoring company only one signal (at 10:00:52 a.m. shortly
after the collapse of WTC 2) indicating a fire condition in the
building on September 11, 2001. This signal did not contain any specific
information about the location of the fire within the building.
[The alarm had been set to “test” mode due to maintenance work] http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/chapter1.pdf (pg28)
Here is the full quote from the NIST report, not some bogus manipulation:
Quote:
Finding 2.25: The fire alarm system that was monitoring WTC 7 sent to the monitoring company only one signal (at 10:00:52 a.m. shortly after the collapse of WTC 2) indicating a fire condition in the building on September 11, 2001. This signal did not contain any specific information about the location of the fire within the building. From the alarm system monitor service view, the building had only one zone, “AREA 1.” The building fire alarm system was placed on TEST for a period of 8 h beginning at 6:47:03 a.m. on September 11, 2001. Ordinarily, this is requested when maintenance or other testing is being performed on the system, so that any alarms that are received from the system are considered the result of the maintenance or testing and are ignored. NIST was told by the monitoring company that for systems placed in the TEST condition, alarm signals are not shown on the operator’s display, but records of the alarm are recorded into the history file.
http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/chapter1.pdf (pg28)
I think that's more than a coincidence “so that any alarms that are received from the system are considered the result of the maintenance or testing and are ignored". This means the fake fire crew would be there before anybody else and could spin a yarn that such and such was going on inside. _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
The cop looked very uncop like with the beard, mind you im not an expert on new york cops. _________________ "Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our mind..." Bod Marley
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
