Charleston E-mail's Released

[mcl312]

http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2.../01/01routley/

[flipper123]

Wow.
The lead investigator sent this to one of his team members:
"As we dig deeper into the incident analysis we discover even more ways of screwing up a fire suppression event- at every level. It's absolutely amazing."
http://media.charleston.net/2010/pdf...ate_100407.pdf

Interesting to see what those guys are really saying to each other during an investigation.
They always use professional terminology and avoid really saying what they feel in their reports.
And from a brief read of some of the messages, it would seem the chief, and/or the mayor, were doing their best to duck and cover:
"I do not believe that I have to state my overwhelming support for ousting the leadership (and I use that term lightly) of the CFD. You can’t expect a dysfunctional child to improve himself — it is literally and figuratively impossible."

Understandable maybe, but not very good leadership.
I think those that died deserve better.
Just my read on it, of course.

[CaptOldTimer]

http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2.../01/01routley/

First of all, I am not sure the intentions of the OP on this. Either he is dragging our Brothers who died through the ashes by posting this or he had nothing else better to do. I not sure if the OP is a fireman or is old enough to be one in a career department.

As others have said, you can't believe everything in the media be it the TV or papers. They have a way to distort things.

[mcl312]

Why post this ?

Silly me, I thought this was a forum where you posted and discussed serious topics related to the fire service.....why is an article that discusses the behind the scene issues of the Charleston investigation inappropriate ? How is this disrepectful ? I stopped visiting these forums for a long time.....now I know why...I will go way so you can all discuss blue lights and sirens.

By the way Im in my 50's and have been a career firefighter in the northeast for allmost 30 years.

[flipper123]

I haven't read anything anywhere that disparaged the efforts of the fallen firemen.
Most of the blame was pointed at their command, or lack thereof, in certain areas.
And I have no problem with that.

[cozmosis]

First of all, I am not sure the intentions of the OP on this. Either he is dragging our Brothers who died through the ashes by posting this or he had nothing else better to do.

I don't see that at all. This is a firefighting web site. Charleston is a significant firefighting topic -- and will be for years to come. Posting this (and discussing it) makes sense to me. I believe in honoring the fallen. You do not honor them by avoiding discussion of the fire that lead to their deaths.

Some might think the release of these e-mails makes the consultants look bad. That might be the case if their findings were off-base, which they were not. With that said, it's important to remember that when you're on the government's dime... your e-mails and phone calls are most likely FOI-able.

[MassFireGuy]

First of all, I am not sure the intentions of the OP on this. Either he is dragging our Brothers who died through the ashes by posting this or he had nothing else better to do. I not sure if the OP is a fireman or is old enough to be one in a career department.

As others have said, you can't believe everything in the media be it the TV or papers. They have a way to distort things.

Seriously?

[LaFireEducator]

There was a lot of blame to be shared in Charleston.

The Chief.

The IC.

And yes, even the company officers that responded, and yes, died, that day.

The fact is the only way to prevent another Charleston is to talk about the event, and that does mean assigning blame where it is appropriate. That does include those who died if their decisions and actions contributed to the event.

[MassFireGuy]

There was a lot of blame to be shared in Charleston.

The Chief.

The IC.

And yes, even the company officers that responded, and yes, died, that day.

The fact is the only way to prevent another Charleston is to talk about the event, and that does mean assigning blame where it is appropriate. That does include those who died if their decisions and actions contributed to the event.

A few words come to mind when I read the crap that you post... I'll leave it at that.

[LaFireEducator]

A few words come to mind when I read the crap that you post... I'll leave it at that.

So we can't look at an incident, and look at the actions of those who died, and say that they were wrong?

In other words, dead fireman never make mistakes?

The fact is in many cases the firefighters who died did contribute to their own deaths either through actions, tactics and decisions.We need to look at their actions and be able to identify what they did wrong so that those actions will not be repeated.

[Rescue101]

I'm thinking MFG finds it inappropriate for a YBYB to post critical comment of FIREFIGHTERS. Or, at least,that's what I read into it. There are many things about that event that bother me,and I intend to learn everything I can about it. But I WON'T make disparaging remarks about the Dept or the Lost. LEARN YES,but learn in a proactive manner. And no SINGULAR event at that tragedy resulted in the loss of 9 GOOD men,rather it was a culmination of small errors(and maybe a few big ones).Either way,the lessons are there for ALL of us to use in our our operations. T.C.

[BSFD9302]

I'm thinking MFG finds it inappropriate for a YBYB to post critical comment of FIREFIGHTERS. Or, at least,that's what I read into it. There are many things about that event that bother me,and I intend to learn everything I can about it. But I WON'T make disparaging remarks about the Dept or the Lost. LEARN YES,but learn in a proactive manner. And no SINGULAR event at that tragedy resulted in the loss of 9 GOOD men,rather it was a culmination of small errors(and maybe a few big ones).Either way,the lessons are there for ALL of us to use in our our operations. T.C.

AMEN, well put! Besides isn't this what we do, have we not all if not a number of us LEARNED from Hackensack?

[don120]

How many of you have read the Phase I and II reports.

If you have, why do think these e-mails even deserve mention. The facts
reported in these documents are much more damming to the City of Charleston.

I guess the Mayor is trying to discredit the panel that produced it, for the up coming lawsuits. Is he hoping that the civil courts will see their testimony as prejudicial, by implying they "rushed to judgment".


I suspect Mayor Riley to be a sly old southern politician.

Don

[HSJohn]

I believe in honoring the fallen. You do not honor them by avoiding discussion of the fire that lead to their deaths.

........amen!!