"Perhaps their only recourse might have been to get to the roof, but it might not have been likely that they would make it, either.
"Up until now, we've never really had more than one floor burning in a fully-occupied high-rise building.
"Did we ever plan for something of this magnitude? No."
Gosh, do I ever smell a class action lawsuit brewing!
What a bunch of lame-ass excuses. "We've never had more than one floor burning". Well, golly gee! You didn't look very far at what's happened in other cities like Philadelphia or Los Angeles, with multi-story infernos.
Another howler: "Perhaps their only recourse might have been to get to the roof, but it might not have been likely that they would make it, either."
Well, I'll take "not very likely to survive" over "certainly dead" any day!
You have to wonder what these folks were thinking. Assume, for a moment, the fire had been controlled or burnt itself out, and the towers not collapsed. At least six floors of the North Tower had been demolished by the plane's impact, including all the emergency staircases (why the folks up there couldn't get out). How were they proposing to get people down? They certainly couldn't have them all come out into the middle of the unsupported floors liable to collapse. Obviously, the only way out was "up" for those above the fire.
This lame-brains comments, and the WSJ article only reinforce my conviction about a total lack of planning among NYC Emergency Services for what might happen in any high rise in the city with a big fire.