Will Morris, The Washington Post & The Devil Wears Prada

Two photographs from the Washington Post Series, America Under Attack: The Pentagon are of special interest. Both are credited to the Associated Press photographer Will Morris. The first shows a badly burned and injured man being loaded into an ambulance. The man's shirt is off, and to avoid pain, he holds his hands above him. It appears he has lost a leg, and in second, less well known image, it also appears the leg is missing. Apparently, the storyboard intended this to be Lt. Cpl.Brian Birdwell, but he didn't lose his leg and this isn't him. That burned hero went by private car to be the only patient at Georgetown University Hospital. Another AP photographer, Hillery Smith Garrison also took a picture of this unnamed man being loaded onto the ambulance, but her result is only noteworthy for its lack of newsworthiness. Her other work from that morning is equally odd. Neither of them got any names.

"An injured person is loaded into an ambulance outside the Pentagon. Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) placed the casualty total at roughly 100, though it was unclear whether that number included wounded as well as dead."

The accompanying caption displays some skepticism on the part of Post editors. Skelton's estimate, published in the Post on September 11, turns out to be the accurate count of the injured, if a liberal definition, like walk-in, or Left Against Medical Advice, is applied. More widely quoted in the first days was the "official" estimate of 100 to 800, although it is difficult to see how such a wide range could have been imagined given so few employees had returned to work in the area.

A score of images are credited to Morris working for the AP, in a variety that indicates Morris enjoyed wide latitude of movement in the important first hour after the attack on 9-11.

Morris took what may be the most widely distributed image, an iconic close-up of the facade as flames leap from windows, and a car burns.

A second version of the shot was published in The New York Times, with a long, oblique view, before the Pentagon facade fell.



The burning element midway in the NYT long shot, is just that, an element. A rectangular metal holder for propane tanks, as shown in this image.



A photographer dressed in white can be picked out at the extreme left in the following image.



Blowing up the image makes it clear the man is animatedly taking pictures. He is closely paired, it seems, with someone in fireman's turnout gear. Another fireman is nearby but walks away. No one seems concerned with putting out the car fire.

Who is the close-in photographer taking shots aimed in the same point-of-view as the Morris images? Is it Morris? Does it actually need to be Morris in order for photo credit to be attributed to him? Does Will Morris have a recognizable style of action news photography? Does the body of work attributed to him from that morning conform or diverge from his style? Does such privileged access, either of Morris, if this be him, or by him as evidenced in his record, strike any of his professional colleagues or peers as odd, incriminating, or unethical? Where is the fire in the second-story windows?

Is the photographer wearing white specifically so that he can be spotted? Would that be so directions blocking his movement could quickly be given from afar, or so that he can be picked out in an image for rejection, this one being a fluke? Was image manipulation as generally well understood in 2001, as it is today? Couldn't this man's pose of animation have been taught to the rest of the lumpen Pentagon cast that day? Should I qualify these questions as stemming from my opinion? Then, let me say, in my opinion, why else would the devil wear white after Labor Day?

January 15, 2007 An Addendum:

I'm so easy to please anymore.

After dicking around with images as small as 25KB, because that's all I knew, to suddenly click on a 25,000KB whopper is an eye-opening experience. And when it's of a man whom you've just labeled the devil, it'll make those eyes roll back in your head



Because there are at least two areas where size does count--helicopters, and image files--big ones of either can be found at the Department of Defense This image was found here, at this DoD web page where you'll be able to download the high-resolution version, but that's it--a dead end, with no links.

Where is that water going?

I've taken the liberty of cropping several copies and blowing up areas of interest.
I was wrong about none of the images showing fireman really working--these guys are going to town.



010911-M-4122I-039, originally uploaded by stevenwarran.

But I was right about the propane tanks.





010911-M-4122I-039, originally uploaded by stevenwarran.

So, the big question: is this Will Morris of the Associated Press or not?



I wouldn't put it past the devil to have a cheap die job, so don't let a disguise fool you.

If it is Will Morris, what are the implications?

For now, there's 3000 more big images where this one came from.

Hillery Smith Garrison: AP Photographer & Christian Color Terrorist

Of all the photographs taken at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 following a "terrorist attack" there, only a certain percentage were taken by credible professional photojournalists and these we pay heed to, giving them credence over work we imagine is tinged with agendas more than mere reportage.

But, we had it backwards. In a nation as powerful as the U.S., as keen on pursuing wealth and dominance, as committed to inaugurating a new world order through violence and bloodshed, the co-opting of the media is a very old story.

One component, which I've identified as running through much of the professional output, makes psychological use of a color theory, where by the calculated application of tone, hue and chroma, effects can be achieved that lull, soften or even mislead the witness.

A group of images showing scenes of medical triages, for instance, by the AP, UPI, and the Washington Post, is remarkably distinct compared with the remaining record. We gain little in the way of traditional newsworthiness however--we aren't even told where these images are originating from, (I believe this triage took place in the center court of the Pentagon,) let alone learn the identity of any of the victims or responders, a normal function of action news photojournalism.

I have become convinced that all of the professionals with access that day were in the pocket of the Pentagon. The Associated Press' Will Morris took the iconic early shot of the burning building. How he achieved that feat would be news itself.

Morris took the shot of a badly burned Lt. Col. Brian Birdwell being loaded into an ambulance, although we don't learn that from him. Looking over his shoulder and taking a poorer picture, as a sort of verification perhaps, was his AP colleague, Hillery Smith Garrison. I judge her work that day as suspicious because it's atypically poor--if she were freely on the scene so early something more distinctive would have resulted.But then, suddenly, the veil of color theory lifted.

Compare the following two images. The first is credited to Garrison at the AP. My download is the 43.3KB version from seattlepi.com, rather than the 16.38KB Washington Post version.

I owe credit to somebody, I can't remember whom, who first spotted the man with the shoulder bag in both of the images sandwiching this paragraph, which would indicate it's the same group of blue-shirted men at approximately the same time--the presence of fire in Garrison's image is not the smoking gun,, it could be explained away as having been recently extinguished.

The credit, publishing and download history of the second image is unknown to me at present, but I don't mistrust it--it fights the narrative as much as Garrison's delivers. It is a doctored image nonetheless. Reconcile the fire engine's melted backside with a functioning squirter--not.

Nothing gave the day away in my mind earlier than the man looking away, in our direction, with his hand on his hip talking on his cell phone. Don't men push out their hips like that when they're talking with their girlfriends and feeling cocky? Or is he talking to us? He's talking to me, big time. I've never mentioned him before because I like him so much, and his conduct is so egregious, I didn't want to see him get in trouble. "Hello, are you there? Can you hear me now?"


The preceding image is centered on the expanse of facade at issue. It is clear a row of six windows, or six columns, exists between the firetruck and the car. Apparently, the burnt cars were moved at some point later in the morning, towards the fire truck, in order to visually expand the crash impact area for subsequent images. The Garrison image came first of course. If each picture has a motive, here it would be an effort at obscuring the dexter tree to subconsciously expand the playing field.

I am not ambivalent, nor would Freud be, about the fallen Cedar of Lebanon in Garrison's shot, fully erect in the other. Garrison's shot, the beau ideal, was in my opinion an early manipulation to which the subsequent matching of reality didn't catch up. Conflicts such as these are the continuity resolution issues that Hollywood excels at.

I've never learned what the green containers held--powdered oxygen is as good a guess as any--but their relevancy to color theory is clear. Perhaps the other shot, with a different manipulation, is meant to serve as a scrim or confounder. What is being disguised is the gravest of professional sins--image manipulation. Garrison's shot has redacted the space between the damaged see-in area of the Pentagon and the red fire truck. The width between the truck and the car is impossible to account for in Garrison's image--not explainable by a change in the angle of the point-of-view. I count a row of four intact windows on both the first and second stories that in Garrison's view are shown as a vision of hell.

And that my friends, is what motivates Hillery Smith Garrison--the repercussions of hell. Hillery Smith Garrison is, without apology, a photographer with an agenda.

A quick Google pops up Christians in Photojournalism,

"Hillery Smith Garrison is, without apology, a photographer with an agenda
"It’s OK to be a photographer with an agenda," she says, at least if the
agenda itself is a good one."

An African-American graduate of Haverford, with personal agendas as diverse as seeing black men depicted in a positive light, her agenda on September 11 can be surmised.

"There are days that I come away feeling very fulfilled even if I didn’t shoot the
best photo. Sometimes I feel like the real reason for me to be there is to pray.’

In Christian photographers tell of focusing on Jesus, she says

"Every single assignment we get is a two-part assignment," Hillery Smith Garrison said during the conference at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas, March 26-28. "Go out knowing that there are always two reasons why you're sent -- one is that you hope what you shoot gets in the paper, but the other is most important: You may be the only piece of Jesus they see."

Ms. Garrison may be disappointed to know that the piece of Jesus I see through her I want no part of. People, as well as storyboards, have reconciliation issues to deal with. Whatever the impulses, conflicts, and immaterial motivations that inspired her were, she has aligned herself with a diabolical and evil force, and she is far from walking her Christian talk. She now has an opportunity to personally experience one of the highest of Christian virtues--forgiveness based on confession.

Armageddon, that which is hidden shall be revealed, is underway.

James A. Parcell & Juana Arias: The Washington Post Repeats Scoop Role

For credibility’s sake, the narrative record of the September 11, attack at the Pentagon as told in images, required meaningful contributions from outside of the closed loops of the military and government service. However, only a few professional photojournalists had access there on 9-11, as evidenced by the public record. Among the accredited professionals who worked that day, a handful have long associations with the White House, and their work must be judged in that light. Much of the rest is so banal and repetitive that it damns itself. Only a few photo-journalists did heavy lifting in carrying the narrative message of the day, and when their work was published or posted in highly credible outlets, like Will Morris, of the Associated Press, whose iconic images were published in major newspapers and magazines worldwide, the truth of officially sanctioned facts was established.
I believe that Pentagon-operating PSYOP teams gave individual access to the accredited professionals that day not as a courtesy or favor, but to guide their work output. Part of an effort to plant a planned narrative message into the minds' of the world, a message at odds with the truth. Since such manipulation of the truth is the antithesis of news journalism, this implies that all of the credited work is corrupted to some degree. That the effort succeeded in establishing an official version as fact means that work richest in supporting narrative detail is the most corrupt, and anything contradicting the story, is probably the work of honest skepticism.

Given its status as the local paper and one of the national papers of record, the Washington Post needed special care and handling from the Pentagon story tellers, and the special results achieved can now help unravel the truth from the lie. Embedded in the Washington Post's work is an element that appears to be a silent practical joke. How else to explain a newspaper’s publishing of two images together, taken by separate staff photographers, of the same two unnamed women, in impossibly contradictory circumstances, unrecognized behind a veil of color-theory? Below are the twp photographs taken by James A. Parcell and Juana Arias, two of thirteen pictures that WAPO published and continues to post online in an image essay called

America Under Attack: The Pentagon.

In the first, a uniformed service woman assists a civilian office worker in a march out of danger. Framed by a sea of military men in drab and khaki, the emotional reality of the women is heightened, Adding to the drama, a soldier in the foreground looks back over his shoulder in an animated reference to the escape from Sodom, With crisp humility, the military woman helping the fey and pensive civilian also justifies a strong national defense. The bright cerise-colored Rayon blouse the woman wears untucked and unbuttoned is a bull’s eye of color centering the composition. Professional photographers train their eye to spot visual moments like this, and in capturing it, Parcell earned his paycheck.

The second image is more intimate. It appears to be of a gravely wounded woman in a yellow head brace strapped to a backboard, covered with a lilac-colored thermal blanket. Though her eyes and mouth are closed, a uniformed responder leans over her as if to hear her confession, a gloved hand hovers in healing. In a major coincidence, Juana Arias captured the only two images to emerge from the Pentagon that day depicting recognizable facial features on an apparently seriously wounded casualty. In a major twist, identification nonetheless eluded the top editors in the free world.

Rich in a narrative invoking motherhood and God, these images, and others like them, became the icons motivating America's warriors into a religious retaliation. Any doubt as to their authenticity was viewed, for a time, as beyond the pale, and a fear engendered by the release of other images enforced a code of orthodoxy and obedience.

But if we ask, are these the same women in both images, what does that mean? Could the same casualty, apparently in shock and at risk for paralysis in one, get better and relocate elsewhere, to be depicted as marching in a sea of evacuees, as an icon of the "walking wounded," by a different professional, from the same firm, with both of the results turning out to be narrative standouts in a landscape where narrative was rationed and professionals were quarantined. Or did the brace and blanket come later, after her escape? Is the psychological power of color theory so strong, that its ability to mask a fact—these images depict the same women— be so complete, that for five years the obvious would remain unchallenged? Would the planners risk exposure for a joke? Or was this a covert slap in the face to the paper that brought down a president, the message of now it's your turn, itself a part of the subconscious manipulation, along the religious symbolism? For to conclude that, indeed, these are the same women, starts a chain-reaction in understanding, as scales fall from the eyes, and the baskets come off lamps. Complex psychological components of a massive conspiracy—the false flag attacks of 9-11 on the United States of America, by the United States of America, for the rich of the world, who will always be with us. May what is hidden be revealed. Especially the punchline.

The unnamed female civilian was photographed several times by others:


To capture the enemy's entire army is better than to destroy it; to take intact a regiment, a company, or a squad is better than to destroy them. For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. Next best is to disrupt his alliances by diplomacy. The next best is to attack his army. And the worst policy is to attack cities

[I am appending my follow up to The Washington Post Repeats Scoop Role in New Case. simply titled, More to the Washington Post Scoop Case , which I posted on January 7. Still new to blogging, I must still be in a defiant stage, because it seems to me blogging is backwards. How are you supposed to append new information? Or, is it bad form to externalize your internal threads? It's called editing you say? Well, in any event, the WAPO story just got better. Enjoy.]

More to the Washington Post Scoop Case

I was startled to notice that the women who appear in two mutually exclusive photographs in the 13-picture Washington Post series, Attack on America: The Pentagon, which were taken by two different Post photographers, Juana Arias and James A. Parcell, resulting in a doubtful news value, are seen in yet another image in the series, this one again by Parcell. Although not prominent in the composition, neither do the women hide, having their placement obscured, in my opinion, paramentally, disguised by color theory, this time by a fire-engine red.

Something looks off in the composition however, with five subsets not relating to each other. A man could be resting on the back running board of the fire truck, but his butt would be in conflict with the bumper relative to the women. Perhaps that's why another man is assisting him. This may indicate digital artifice has been introduced into the image, like many another. Perhaps the gentleman in shades, and white pants after Labor Day, works for Kroll, or is in the secret service, and has answers. He's giving us the eye like he knows somethings up.

In this blowup the two women seem to be doctored into the image perhaps.

In another image by Juana Arias, published elsewhere in the Washington Post, color theory is having a field day, as an unnamed man, apparently suffering from a great deal of tooth pain, is adjusted by a medical attendant, who wears scrubs that appear to be cut from the same cerise blouse material as the lady pictured as walking wounded. A green on an oxygen bottle is introduced, in too saturated a color to be accidental, with just a touch of the yellow, this time used very sparingly, so obviously a key ingredient. Since any possible meaning escapes me, it must be working, and I wouldn't try color-theory at home without supervision.


In the next picture, color shocks our senses, but to what end? This picture looks like it is by Arias, but it is by a 23-year-old amateur photographer named Michael Kleinfeld, who was allowed highly privileged access into the center court triage that day, and whose work went out on the UPI, but whose subsequent professional career was for naught. Since the composition is by a color theorist extraordinaire, of that there can be no doubt, we must assume that Kleinfeld gave us his all, and is now in a color-blind rest home.

In it, a uniformed-service woman seems to be having a fit of some kind, while her disassociated handlers hold on. It doesn't seem to bother the woman in the foreground who, now making her fourth appearance in related news photographs, is the woman in a yellow neck brace, her cerise tucked under lilac. She is back to serenely resting with her eyes closed, but now she is hooked up to an IV bag delivering fluids, so she must be going down hill.

I wonder what the point of all this play is? The uniformed-service woman, who looks to be in existential pain, has a respirator still around her neck, a detail not much found in the pictures of service members from the Pentagon, except Lincoln Leiber, pushing his oxygen off, to mope like a bad boy. Given the amount of second-hand smoke, face masks would have made a nice touch. This lady looks very similar to the anonymous firefighter in the following image,

who is oddly bundled up for the heat of late day, let alone for the heat of a fire, in a black snood, which then draws the eye down to a helmet lying at her feet, which we presume to be hers, and on which we can make a rare identification, as belonging to a D.C. firefighter. Hood. Helmet. I.D. Heavy-handed if you ask me.
In an interview she gave in 2002, to Women in the Fire Service, Inc. WFS, a District of Columbia Fire Department firefighter, Tomi Rucker, gave a very interesting report about her experience responding to the Pentagon fire on 9-11.

She was working as a fitness instructor at the district training academy, where Engine 34, a reserve piece, is kept. She says, "we were one of the units dispatched to the Pentagon, shortly after 10 a.m. There were seven people on the crew, all of them officers except me, and I was the only woman."

"As soon as we got on the scene, the Secret Service ran up to us and told us to find as many body bags as we could. We thought, "Oh, my God, this is real!" And actually, the Secret Service man called me by my name: "Hey, Rucker, we need body bags." How did he know who I was? I wasn't wearing a name tag. I thought, "This is some heightened security here!"

As they began setting out hose, an official "told us we had to evacuate, because there was another plane on the way. But we'd gotten all of this hose, we were just trying to run to get there with it, get geared up and go in, so we did."

"When we got into the building, we started to feel the heat right away, and as we walked deeper down the hallways, it got hotter and hotter. It was just fire everywhere: not so much smoke, but just fire all around us. You couldn't see the plane, just debris wherever you looked. We'd put water on it, but it would come right back up. We were probably in there 20-25 minutes before they took us out and sent other crews in. After that, we worked outside, doing SCBA changes and other support tasks."

Perhaps in the conceptual stages of 9-11, bigger things were planned for Firefighter Rucker. As an attractive, articulate African American woman, she was central casting to play many cultural meme roles. She was given a very privileged task that day, a 20 minute shift inside of the Pentagon, so her special status is clear. She was participating as part of a highly unusual crew, more fifth-responders, than first. She was recognized by sight, and called by name, by an orchestrator of the day's events, whom she identifies as secret service. Her team marched to the beat of their own drum, contrary to orders. But for reasons unknown, any parts she was intended to play in the after-story were sidelined.

She gives an overview of her feelings in the interview

"People on the scene were angry. Actually, it was a whole host of emotions: angry, scared, confused. We knew about the firefighters in New York, we couldn't accept how many must have died, but we knew from seeing it on TV they had to be dead. I remember thinking, "How much hatred could a person have for this country that they could do something like this?"
"Then you start thinking retaliation. We've got to get these people back for this. At that point, we really weren't sure who had initiated the attack. We were still trying to make ourselves believe that it had really happened. Was it really an accident? The media tells you a lot of things, and you don't know what to believe."

I couldn't have said it better myself. Rucker has achieved some measure of fame following her response to 9-11. But her looks have changed for some reason, and since I couldn't ID her with any assurance to begin with, I can now only say, God speed, Tomi Rucker. I hitched my star on your wagon knowing what I don't know--it's the unknown unknowns we have to watch out for. Be well.

Maxho I know, It's Beautiful Below

This is a rare and wondrous image, as beautiful to look upon, as it is fruitful to my agenda. It occupies a singular status in the record of the attack on the Pentagon, as being the only image, to my knowledge, of the medical triage in the center court on September 11, 2001, released by Di Lorenzo Tricare Health Clinic. (Apparently several vignettes were produced under the spreading yews for commercial release.) We don't see the famous, soon to be lamented, hot-dog stand, but is that an Oleander in bloom? How divine. What a paragon of color theory is this composition, to relax the mind and rest the eye. And look at those strides the men make! That's the way forward, purposeful, not lachrymose!

But what are so many of the men doing wearing towels around their necks? Have they been fighting fires? And what are those long dark objects they carry? They look like metal bed frames, are they gurneys of some kind? Or grills?

With their open metal mesh construction, they look awfully similar to these containers for holding propane tanks, we see in the damaged area at the front of the Pentagon. Why propane was held there is beyond explanation. Very Forward Operating Base Falcon, if I do say so. I can't imagine how they weren't seen for what they were before, by the unaided human eye. Was a similar pyromancy going on inside the Pentagon, as was taking place outside, or one even better?


In an interview she gave in 2002, to Women in the Fire Service, a District of Columbia Fire Department firefighter, Tomi Rucker, said,

"When we got into the building, we started to feel the heat right away, and as we walked deeper down the hallways, it got hotter and hotter. It was just fire everywhere: not so much smoke, but just fire all around us. You couldn't see the plane, just debris wherever you looked. We'd put water on it, but it would come right back up. We were probably in there 20-25 minutes before they took us out and sent other crews in. After that, we worked outside, doing SCBA changes and other support tasks."

It sounds like she was taken on a ride at the state fair. My imagination runs the gamut from a simple jumbo revolving George Foreman grill to something completely Dante-esque. And isn't it interesting, men who start fires instead of putting them out. Just like in the movie of Ray Bradbery's book, Fahrenheit 451--the temperature at which paper spontaneously ignites, which is much lower than the temperature at which steel eventually melts. And where have I heard this construction before, oh yes, Fahrenheit 9-11, the movie made by the nemesis of the Bush administration, Michael Moore. Well, isn't that...hot.

Daryl Donley said during a videotaped slide presentation at the Library of Congress, here that the famous two-page spread in a year-end Life magazine of his photograph of a fireball, was of "a secondary explosion, probably, don’t know, probably another tank of fuel in the back of the plane and, it was probably about three or four minutes after the impact, umm, it is about 35 feet in diameter, the explosion goes up to the fourth floor, above ground on the Pentagon." Obviously, it wasn't a tank of gas, both tank and fuel had atomized, remember? Maybe it was a shaped charge?

Once you get your head around all these awful facts, you stop dissipating your energy defending the indefensible. The performances put on by the firemen in front of the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, as recorded in the photographic record, are a big joke. We never, not once, see firemen doing their job, which is, and I'll speak slowly here, putting t h e w a t e r o r t h e f o a m o n t h e f i r e. Like with the staged rescues, and the imagined heroism, we see only malingering, with a total lack of focus, shamed-based split-personalities, which before, the public mistook for a kind of Kabuki-awe. The fire was out within the first ten minutes, it didn't restart spontaneously during the "intermissions," when everybody pulled back due to fake "incoming" warnings, this was time to redress the stage, and rethink the improvisations and restart the fires.

Poured concrete is an excellent insulator, how the fire crawled up the walls and got into the roof is impossible to explain, but what a pretty fire it made during the night. In the context of the deaths in New York, these firemen appall me. I wonder who out of the 189 named dead, may be alive, living in seclusion or rendition. But I know some good people died that morning--stuff happens. So to the grill men, manning the gauntlet, you came to work that Tuesday morning knowing full well. That's the opposite of valorous--callow and craven for a start. I hope Kevin Schaeffer gets you. You've got it coming. On edit: Fuck Kevin Schaeffer.

Alan Ladd Yokum, his wife Beulah, bury their son,U.S. Navy Intelligence Officer Kevin Wayne Yokum, First Community Baptist Church in Lake Charles, LA September 29, 2001.

In this well known, high-resolution image, the attention has always been on the fireman to the right, who breaks at the hip as he leans on his "staff" like a shepherd, invoking Him, I suppose, although I think our man looks more like an elegant form painted on a black-figure Attic vase.

But if you look closer, peer into the background, you'll find His antithesis, our man in white, Mephistopheles, now with a blue jacket on. As shocking as it was to first spot a devil wearing white, even devils become mundane after overexposure, as he fiddles with his camera, or rolls a joint, he inappropriately draws the only focused attention shown by the firemen all day.

Is it Will Morris, or a stand in? May be the last good read on the subject of journalists being co-opted by the CIA was written by Carl Bernstein in 1977, titled simply, The CIA and the Media, it was published in the October 20 issue of Rolling Stone magazine. It doesn't really matter one way or the other is the short answer.



In an earlier blog I said the Russian language web site I link to for the aerial view of the Pentagon in relationship to Reagen National Airport, also posted on his site some scenes of the devastation in New York following 9-11. I was wrong. He was actually in the air flying on the Hudson, and flew past as the buildings burned and before they fell. He captures that terrible moment when the world changed from an unique vantage point. The effect it has is very powerful. The majestic lesson inherent in our collective experience of 9-11 cannot be imposed by the criminals who think the day belongs to them, we must co-opt it. If you see it for what it is you must respond with truth. Seeing these images again, as if for the first time, but of course, I couldn't have, is a sign that I remain in the flow of God's consciousness. I hope you have the same sense of God's presence viewing them. There are no coincidences. We live in amazing times. Blessings. http://www.maxho.com/wtc/ The disaster as it unfolds By the way, this is what disaster, rescue, heroism, green aircraft primer, and grace, look like. The color theory is all wrong though. They obviously just didn't know.

When Did the Pentagon Get Attacked Exactly?

The New York Times, the national newspaper of record, cited in a September 12, 2001, article, "Plane Slams Into Pentagon," that the attack occurred "about 9:30," but in a second article in the Times that day, Hijacked Jets Destroy Twin Towers and Hit Pentagon by Serge Schemann, the attack is said to have occurred "at 9:40 a.m." Then on September 15, in an article by Matthew Wald, "After the Attack: Sky Rules," the NYT gives the time of the attack as 9:45am.

The local newspaper of record, The Washington Post, first reported (at 4:59pm on 9-11-01,) that the plane crashed at 9:20am. But the Washington Post reported the next day that the plane crashed 17 minutes later, at 9:37am, Timeline in Terrorist Attacks (9-12-01) cached

A second large news organization embedded into the Pentagon, CNN also said in an early report that a plane had struck at 9:20 a.m.---CNN, in an interview between Bob Franken & Tim Timmerman, aired at 1:46pm on 9-11-01. But then again, in a CNN timeline, Chronology of terror, the strike is recorded at 9:43am.

So, here's a list. Feel free to add on.

• 9:20am The Washington Post By Barbara Vobejda (4:59pm on 9-11-01)
• 9:20am CNN interview Bob Franken & Tim Timmerman, (1:46pm on 9-11-01)
• 9:30am--"about," Reuters, (at 3:57pm on 9-11-01)
• 9:30am--"about," USAToday, Bush Vows Retaliation, (6:11am on 9-12-01)
• 9:30am--"about," The New York Times, Plane slams into Pentagon, (9-12-01)
• 9:30am "about" The Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star, 'Terrorists strike heart of nation's'
• 9:30am--"shortly after," U.S. News & World Report
• 9:36am Frank Probast, A defiant recovery
• 9:37am Newsday,
• 9:37am The Washington Post Timeline in Terrorist Attacks (9-12-01) cached
• 9:38am CNN, Chris Plante, Government Failed to React to FAA, (9-16)
• 9:38am Richard Clarke, Against All Enemies
• 9:38am USAToday, Terror Attacks Brought Drastic... (8-13-02)
• 9:40am AP,Pentagon attack came minutes after Rumsfeld predicted: 'There will be another event' by Robert Burns, 5:58 p.m. 9/11/2001
• 9:40am Air Force Link
• 9:40am The New York Times, Day of Terror (9-12-01)
• 9:40am'Lawmakers, tourists race to flee crash,' By Gary Martin,
  San Antonio Express-News Washington Bureau, September 12, 2001

• 9:40am--"about," U.S. Medicine, Pentagon Medics Remember Ramos
• 9:43am Pentagram Dennis Ryan, Where is safe? (9-14-01)
• 9:43am The New York Times, The Tragic Timeline (9-12-01) cached
• 9:43am The Washington Times Rowan Scarborough Survivor studies the whys of (9-11-01)
• 9:43am CNN timeline, Chronology of terror,
• 9:45am The New York Times After The Attack: Sky Rules 9-15-01 Matthew Wald
• 9:45am Scripps Howard, At the Pentagon, Fear & Anger,
• 9:45am National Electrical Contractors Assoc. 9-14-01 VDV Workers Dodge Death During.....
• 9:45am "about" The Baltimore Sun, Fire, chaos after attack on Pentagon (9-12-01)
• 10:00am--"just before," CNSNews.com, Witnesses Describe Pentagon Crash, (9-11)

There we have it, a full 40 minutes of variation as to the exact timing of the attack which occurred September 11, 2001 in Arlington Virgina.

Read the following; even the army itself was looking for help pinning down a likely ETOA.

"Since the time of plane impact at the Pentagon had often been reported with large scatter, the United States Army contacted us to inquire whether we could obtain an accurate time of the Pentagon attack on September 11, 2001 based upon our seismic network. We analyzed seismic records from five stations in the northeastern United States, ranging from 63 to 350 km from the Pentagon. Despite detailed analysis of the data, we could not find a clear seismic signal. Even the closest station (= 62.8 km) at Soldier’s Delight, Baltimore County, Maryland (SDMD) did not record the impact. We concluded that the plane impact to the Pentagon generated relatively weak seismic signals. However, we positively identified seismic signals associated with United Airlines Flight 93 that crashed near Shanksville, Somerset County, Pennsylvania. The time of the plane crash was 10:06:05 (EDT)."

Seismic Observations during September 11, 2001, Terrorist Attack
Actually, the scientists only studied the seismic records from 09:36:30 (EDT) to 09:39:30 (EDT). Isn't that a wonderful way to beat the system?!
Isn't "scatter" a wonderful word. Would it be an adverb, or adjective? I'll have to ask Riskus.

On a thread somewhere, already started, is a dialog addressing the coded meaning behind the bevy of pictures of clocks found in the evidential record of the September eleventh "attack" on the Pentagon. In typically heavy-handed military fashion, the United States Department of Defense bludgeons us over the head with clocks until we're dizzy, while a simple alluding tap might have been more effective as a tactic, or does that constitute a strategy?
(Would it be rude to point out here that no precautions like this were taken at ground zero in New York to protect the health, safety and welfare of the responders? This is a very high-contrast detail between the two events, with grave moral consequences. Do government workers really consider themselves such a protected class? Well, illnesses are going to begin developing very soon in New York from the Silverstein asbestos abatement program. And Arlington, you really should have laid off on the disposable plastic gloves a bit. It was an emergency, remember, not a drill. Way ahead of the societal hiegene curve there men.)

But in a way, we could just let the Pentagon keep steering and eventually we'd wind up at the truth. They seem almost childish in the way they unwittingly telegraph the most fraudulent details as being components of the official lie, I mean, storyline, overstating the particulars, so we want to whisper a warning, paraphrasing: "Lady, methinks thou doth place too much emphasis."

There are several categories of images to prove this point. Most notably for me personally, are those damned downed lampposts, endlessly mentioned and referenced. It's as if some scaffolding were damaged in New York City that same morning, and that was what people went on and on about. Yes, it was a good bit of business, just not good enough to launch endless war off its back, nor in contrast to the seven-million stories coming out of New York . Maybe someone congratulated themselves too soon and slouched off.

I assembled a file with a dozen published images showing Palestinians celebrating in the aftermath of 9-11. A common theme has children firing guns in the air. Who do you think organized and benefited from those images? Each is accompanied by a descriptive caption, which is more than can be said about any image from Arlington. These false, made-up scenes were widely distributed across the country on the eleventh and twelfth of September, until blow back led to a hasty recall, like Falwell's and Robertson's tone-deaf blaming of 9-11 on the homo and lesbian insistence on the right to abortion---like it's so important to them.

Was it mere coincidence the Palestinian storyline went out to do its damage? Even after the denials and retractions, the demonization of Muslims was on, which was the point.

I started collecting images relating to the Red Cross blood drive meme, but I became overwhelmed with the huge numbers. Politicians especially, near a camera, liked to roll up their sleeves for a good pricking. While everybody of good conscience did whatever they could to help in the aftermath of 9-11, a dramatic and patently absurd cry for volumes of blood was never sincere. It was a manipulative ploy run by the government, to raise the emotional stakes, to literally have us become part of events, to whipsaw us with a good feeling, but it was false. Especially in Arlington, and to a degree in New York, there were remarkably few wounded or injured casualties relative to the number who died. Likewise, the Pentagon's planting, on the front page of the first edition of the Washington Post, of a request for refrigerated trucks to store dead bodies, which were being overstated in the press by a factor of eight, was sheer nonsense, Karen "Evil" Hughes forte.

One of my earliest Pentagon files I named "Pretty Little Yellow Thingies," for some obscure reason, to store images displaying a wanton overuse of yellow police crime-scene tape. In many instances the effect is comical. But I don't need to remind anyone the Pentagon is no good at art direction. Just recall the hookah someone placed in a crevasse of a bin Laden cave setting, in one of the US-manufactured and "Al-Jazeera" released tapes "taking" credit and responsibility.

I delayed posting about the clocks because I remembered having once seen an image with a molten clock face, and I wanted to locate and include it. But perhaps I just dreamed it up, in which case, maybe I've revealed more than I intended.

On Edit, Feb. 27, 2007-- Just when I started to feel a bit discouraged as a result of some tough-guy BCO bullying and assorted threats, my higher power comes through for me by offering the following:

Photo by Martin Smith-Rodden / The Virginian-Pilot
A melted clock bears witness to the explosions and fire that devoured Army and Navy offices last Sept. 11, when a hijacked airliner crashed into the Pentagon. The attack killed 189 people. Out of Nowhere: Inside the Pentagon 9/11 By EARL SWIFT, The Virginian-Pilot

Then I did a cursory check of the different time stamps placed on the attack in the media, and this was a good hook to hang a clock myth on. Apparently, it was not a case of airplane strikes building, makes big bang, and we're done. We had secondary explosions, (Daryl Donley now says his famous fireball photograph was three minutes in, as "rear" gas tanks exploded,) with the overcompensation of three false alarms requiring retreats, as the advanced missiles, (or perhaps propane tanks and fuel oil tanks?) meant to protect the heart of American military might, suddenly "blew up," all convenient to some subterranean infrastructure known as "ventilation ducts." What are the tubes in the following image? Exploded ordinances? Not aluminum tubes for centrifuges again?

(Blown up from High-resolution, Department of Defense release, Jason Ingersoll JPEG # DM-SD-02-03910, see also DM-SD-02-03911 JPEG INGERSOLL)

God is good! What a gift to be given the following image! I was flying on a wing and a prayer before now. From the Yale archives and certainly looking very H.E. to me.

(You know, if this image had been filed in the ROTC file in the Yale archives instead of in a forestry file, it would have been expurgated long ago, so, ha, ha, lucky me.)

The round symmetrical hole in the interior drive labeled "Punchout" should have been two punchouts. The heaviest elements in a jetliner are the two jet engines, and they would maintain their momentum as a significant force. Instead we are told the nose made the "punchout" hole. I wonder what sort of force could blow out these second-story windows in the following shot.

010912-N-3235P-029 U. S. Naval photo by Photographer’s Mate 1st Class Michael W. Pendergrass.

The damage seems more consistent with shaped charges than with jet fuel fires to my little old mind.

Do you think I'm going to let you reorganize my neural pathways around an understanding that this is what happened to the wings?

Sgt. Carmen Burgess: Coming in on the Pentagon Off-ramp

Scott Walsh's Patriot Video No. 1

Below is a 5:34-minute video by a man who will one day rate as a saint, but don't be scared off by the fact. Scott Walsh saved what might be the last known capture of a snippet of uncredited cable news video that shows former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld helping man a litter-bearing team outside of the Pentagon in the first 20 minutes after someone began an endless war there on 9-11. Rumsfeld appears at the 2:27 mark, he's only there for 4 seconds, when you hear the drumbeat of the rat-a-tat-tat, get ready.

Scott's "Patriot Video 1" was made as an art project really--one of a series of efforts he made to process his emotions in the aftermath of 9-11, our emotional reality being one way to tell us apart--different from the un-shocked, co-conspirators, who went straight to agenda without first passing through sorrow. Apparently Scott captured the video off live television, earlier, you see a video ID watermark on some of the clips, TLC, for The Learning Channel.

What a teaching it channels too. Although, the historical fact of Rumsfeld's behavior is well known through multiple official sources, seeing is believing, in wonderment as the Secretary fails to take appropriate steps to protect himself from further surprise enemy attack, goes "missing" to others in the government instead, to grandstand for the camera, before eventually reentering the building, the first to seed, according to reports, "It was a commercial jetliner that crashed into the building," thereby planting the storylet with a healthy dose of manure.

Some components of the story were jettisoned after being shown once on TV, as the puppet masters voted up or down on the elements as they flowed forth. Someone decided they'd made a mistake with Rumsfeld, and pulled the storyboard quick, but an irrationality that stemmed from the error rippled throughout the day as a consequence, stranding rows of empties as props, something colorful to lean on. Life didn't hang in the balance, so much as got drug out interminably. Without first articulating the foundational storyline of vain and valorous effort, (with just a touch of "dear chairman" thrown in,) the trickle-down motifs of man's heroic struggle to save lives, Marines do not leave their buddies behind, was lost. Without a team of quick, animated, kinetic winners, shown against the smoke of battle, or fog of war, there was nothing plausible to hide behind. So left out in the harsh light was this:

I don't mean to criticize this composition's auteur with undue hauteur, although I guess I'm trying to get a rise by using the French. Sgt. Carmen L. Burgess was the most professional and credible member of the whole in-house pictorial entourage, but he was working under some trying handicaps, like having to film his action-packed foregrounds in advance, to get them out of the way for some reason. That led to post-production problems, like the poor matching in the color of the grass, which is an unpardonable dereliction in professional duty.

The photographer's responsibility is to click the shutter at a moment of maximum emotional expression. Even professional actors can't be on stage all the time, although I know one who thinks he can. This amateur late-summer-stock cast is charming, but I think they were going for something more literally disarming. The guy and gal in front are the energetic up-and-comers, while the others are typical army stoics that hide behind them, so first, try reversing the blocking. The trick would be to get the stoics animated, and to stun the gushers into wide-eyed awe. Instead, we get The Iceman Cometh meets Guys and Dolls, not bad I suppose, for a a force that lives by the motto: don't ask, don't tell.

My point is this, just because the narrative hatch marks are checked off; like, service branches and ranks, pitching in together-meme--check, and, African-American lady victim, probably never thought she'd see the day-meme--check, there's no way these folks could act their way out of a wet paper bag, and reality may be a wet paper bag. This result is very disappointing. It's not like the military doesn't understand the drama of crashes and explosions, and smoke and flames, and the effect it has on people, it's that they weren't willing to risk really using it on themselves. They can dish it out but they can't take it. To make this work you'd need an 18-minute continuous running pan shot of shock and awe, like Altman's start to Nashville.

Over on stage right, another misfire, one that should have gone straight to video and skipped the theaters. Our Car-Lo Burgess, once again, with ennui, mismatching the fore-ground with the back, the yesterday not looking much like today. I wonder, as seen through both of Karen Hughes two evil eyes, is this scene the basis for Global War on Terror? To me it's a Gobble Waddles on Turkeys

First, what is that demented looking man doing with that women's child? [a meme?] I know you have daycare, [meme] they got the children out onto the sunny lawn to play, [meme] then why drag that tiny child into a war zone, to show her off? She's a tiny infant. I think the man on the cell phone is calling S.A.G. to report the terrible acting--hunching his shoulders over like that doesn't make him appear to be protecting the baby--it makes him look seedy, like he stole her to get on the last lifeboat off the Titanic. Three extras in the background are standing in a clump, one with his back turned to the action. He is leaning against the car, animatedly making a point with his arm about last night's ballgame. It looks pretty casual to me.

There were 32 chaplains inside the building that day, by coincidence, attending a conference. Were they trotted out for for a kick line behind Father Stephen McGraw, while a Lesbian Nun with an acoustic guitar played Kum ba Yah, my Lord, but it was cut as not explosive enough?

Sorry. My meme.

This is supposed to be the air space where a massive jetliner flew less than 20 feet off the ground at 530 miles-per-hour according to the Kean report, just moments before, with a singeing vortex, a turbulent sucking, and a percussive blast knocking down lamp poles. There hasn't been anything overhead here recently, except for the Oscar Meyer Weiner-Balloon, and we know it's shadow when we see it.

I can't keep this up, but I want to leave Burgess with some company, so I thought this Paul Disney image was ridiculous enough to eat out on for a month. It conveys the truth of the terrible fraud that was perpetrated that day by using that overused symbol of this medical response, the empty rolling gurney, as the team strolls towards Scarborough fair. No one came out of the building after the first 20 minutes. No one should have come out this side of the building period. Should anyone come out of the building here, they would be covered in smoke and soot. There were triage sites set up in the North and South parking lots, and in the center court. This site was staged for the cameras. Even if this triage site were set up with sincerity, it would have been dismantled after the first of three timed retreats to safety after "reports of incoming" were "issued."

The six anonymous responders with their backs turned towards us are moving in on an off ramp. To get to the action, they will next have to climb over wide concrete barriers and at least two metal barriers. They could have simply driven in under the overpass, like everyone else.

These inane and phony pictures were staged to disguise the fact there were far fewer than even 100 wounded. Somewhere between 35 and 17 is my guess, with seven serious burns. The line between life and death was redrawn on this day, I guess they thought they could redraw the map too.The mound of dirt seen in this picture was used as a stage backdrop and platform in many scenes, a place to play hide and seek and show and tell. So anonymous soldiers could walk up the hill and Jake and Jill could come down, and where Humpty-Dumpty could have his bad fall. In my storyboard, it will forever be a grassy knoll.

Below are a few images of un-peopled conveyances that illustrate my point. To be fair, I will post a file of images which show wounded on stretchers, gurneys, and litters, but segregated out, and seen together, they make my point supporting fraud, just in a different way.