« FDNY Press Release about Name Change to FDNY's Building Inspection Program | Main | Why is FDNY trying to come up with a plan to inspect toxic building? Is it because FDNY lacked such a plan while Captain Pete Bosco was assigned to Engine 10 »

Is Captain Peter Bosco being framed for violating rules that did not exist during his assignment to Ten Engine?

Weinlein_Inspections_WTC_Contaminated_Buildings.jpg

Captain Peter Bosco and the two chiefs are being framed for violating rules that did not exist during Captain Peter Bosco's assignment to the Ten House.  In this memo, Michael Weinlein, the Manhattan Borough Commander for FDNY, admits that he is working with the New York State Department of Labor to formulate rules to govern the inspection of World Trade Center (WTC) Contaminated Buildings.

Something doesn't make sense.  

If FDNY did not have rules for inspecting WTC contaminated buildings how can the three fire officers be sidelined for not inspecting a WTC contaminated building? 

Surely the fact that FDNY and NYS DOL are in the process of formulating rules for the inspection of toxic buildings is evidence - proof positive - that the so called fifteen day rule was not applicable to the inspection of toxic buildings. If it was applicable, Weinlein and the NYS DOL would be wasting their time duplicating something that already exists, no?  The only reason Weinlein and NYS DOL are formulating rules for toxic building inspections is that such rules are needed and did not exist in the past (click here)

Can they do this in America? Can they punish three diligent and decorated firefighters for violating rules that did not exist? Apparently, they think so.  Isn't that being arbitrary and capricious? You bet it is.

Moreover, take a look at the level at which the process of formulating rules for the inspection of toxic buildings is taking place?  Is it taking place at the level of the local firehouse? No.  Is it taking place at the level of Battalion Chief? No. Is it taking place at the level of Division Chief? No.  The level at which the rules formulation is taking place is the level of the FDNY's Manhattan Borough Commander and the New York State Department of Labor. So, who do you blame for not having a plan in place to inspect toxic buildings?  Do you blame the local firehouse? No. Do you blame the Battalion chief? No.  Do you blame the Division Chief? No. Don't you blame the level of FDNY whose responsibility it is to make such a plan? Yes. 

Has Scoppetta "taken too many feeds" while on the job that he can no longer do simple logical reasoning? Oh, I forgot, Scoppetta was never a firefighter and has never "taken a feed" in his life! Scoppetta can do simple logical reasoning. However, simple logical reasoning leads him away from those he wants to scapegoat. Why let simple logical reasoning get in the way of his attempt at framing three diligent and decorated firefighters?

Why do you think that FDNY is trying to frame the three fire officers? Because, since 9/11/01 - more than six (6) years ago - the upper crust of FDNY has failed to come up with a plan to inspect toxic buildings. Isn't six (6) years enough time for FDNY to change its legal framework to accommodate the events of 9/11 and the toxic buildings it created? 

 The guilty are trying to blame the innocent in a craven attempt to protect themselves from blame. We are not going to let that happen. Ask the simple questions: "Why has it taken more than six (6) years for FDNY to come up with a plan to inspect the WTC contaminated buildings? Could you please now show us the plan? Please. How much more time do you need to complete it, Mr. Scoppetta? Another six (6) years?"

In a report by Marcia Kramer, she quotes a testy Mayor Bloomberg:

"Can't conceive of how anybody thinks we should leave anybody in a position where there's a question as to whether or not they were taking the steps to keep the city safe," Bloomberg said. "That's what their job is."

What about Sideline Scoppetta, Mr. Mayor?  Why are you leaving him in a position where there's a question as to whether or not he was taking the steps to keep the city safe?  Isn't that his job?  Or do you pontificate one set of rules for the scapegoats and another set of rules for your tea and crumpet cronies? What about Bovis, Mr. Mayor? (click here) Why punish FDNY and not Bovis (click here)? What about NYC DOB, Mr. Mayor? You do understand that NYC DOB was a "REGULATOR" (Click here) and FDNY was not, don't you? If not, here is a list of "REGULATORS" that LMDC drew up for you to review (Click here).

Do you yet understand why the world thinks you have scapegoated these three diligent and dedicated fire officers, Mr. Mayor and Mr Scoppetta (Click Here)? The evidence of their innocence is overwhelming yet they continue to be "lifted" and you have singled out FDNY and no-one else.

 

Note:  I hope NYS DOL is not letting FDNY into 130 Liberty St. without the required H.A.S.P. being in place. If you thought no-one would notice, rest assured, we noticed.

 

FreePetey's past blogs explaining the inapplicability of the fifteen day rule to the deconstruction - decontamination of the toxic Deutsche Bank Building are found as follows:

  • 11/05/2007 -  Is Captain Peter Bosco being framed for violating rules that did not exist during his assignment to Ten Engine? - Click Here
  • 10/23/2007 - A DIFFERENT TIME; A DIFFERENT PLACE - Click here.
  • 10/22/2007 - THE MYSTERY IS THE STARTING OF INSPECTIONS NOT THEIR STOPPING - Click Here
  • 10/21/2007 - THE FIFTEEN DAY RULE -  Click Here
  • 10/5/2007 - THE DUTY TO INSPECT - Click Here
  • 9/23/2007 - FDNY ENGINE 10 ORDERED BACK INTO 130 LIBERTY STREET - Click here.
  • 9/18/2007 - NYS LABOR LAW §27-a(3)(a)Duties  Click here.
  • The Chernobyl Firefighters Click Here
(Once again FreePetey.com is indebted to Deep Throat for his assistance with this article and to the other courageous firefighters who refuse to knuckle under to their feckless leader)

 

Posted on Monday, November 5, 2007 at 07:35PM by Registered Commenter[Your Name Here] | CommentsPost a Comment

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>