Wednesday, December 31, 2008

"As Remnants Collapse, Workers Run For Cover," by Jennifer Steinhauer, The New York Times, Sept. 13, 2001

In Peter Duveen's [pduveen's] hard-copy archive of New York Times and New York Post articles, a Times piece by Jennifer Steinhauer from September 13th, stands out for its startling depiction of World Trade Center damage. In it, she describes the collapse of a sizable remaining portion of Tower 2's frame and infrastructure late on the afternoon of September 12th, left standing more than 24-hours after the first tower had been reduced to a dust cloud about 10:00am on the eleventh.

Were it not for this single-source reference---apparently submerged somehow within the public record for the past seven years---the fact of a two-stage collapse, which created a similar massive dust cloud of smoke and debris the next day, would remain "officially" unknown, since no document or report comments on it, to my knowledge. This important detail, which could speak to how and why the steel-framed tower collapsed, would then have been, after the passing of the last live witness to it, extinguished.

Pre-titled, AFTER THE ATTACKS: AFTERSHOCKS; "As Remnants Collapse, Workers Run For Cover," Steinhauer writes,
"The stalagmite remnants of the fallen World Trade Center towers collapsed entirely yesterday, sending rumbling debris and clouds of smoke billowing again through Lower Manhattan and prompting rescue workers to flee from the site of the destruction. Officials declared a zone of roughly eight more blocks in the area unstable.

City officials confirmed last night that the steel and concrete wreckage of the south tower, which had been toppled in a terrorist attack, and 5 World Trade Center, felled in the aftermath, crumpled to the ground in the late afternoon.

Fire Commissioner Thomas Von Essen said last night at a news conference that engineers were busy inspecting neighboring buildings in response to reports of a crack in 1 Liberty Plaza, the 64-story high rise. That plaza has sustained structural damage, but officials said last night that although they had not determined the extent of the damage to that building or others on Liberty Street, they did not believe that it was in imminent danger of collapse.

All day yesterday, rescue and emergency workers battled through the destruction, confronting ruptured gas lines, raining debris and constant rumors of other buildings said to be weakened from the attacks.

''This is a very dangerous rescue effort,'' Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani said last night. ''The men and women who are doing it are literally putting their lives at risk.''

The fragile search and recovery efforts were hampered intermittently for several hours, and precautionary evacuations led to moments of panic among rescue workers. Police and emergency workers in the areas around the destruction barked into their radios, arguing with pedestrians trying to cross barriers and telling them that more and more buildings were unstable.

Officials also said yesterday that it did not appear that the residential buildings in Battery Park City had sustained structural damage, but the city was still assessing those buildings to decide whether to allow those who have been evacuated to return.

The seeming aftershocks began about about 5 p.m. yesterday, while workers ploddingly cut through twisted steel and heavy forklifts moved rubble across the plaza in front of the fallen towers. Firefighters and police officers were standing around, gazing toward the clouds of gray smoke wafting up from the jagged heaps of wreckage. Nearby, workers had set up a triage center near the World Financial Center.

First came a rumble, and then one firefighter yelled: ''That part will go! We are waiting for it to collapse.'' Moments later, the remaining floors of the south tower of the World Trade Center fell to the ground in a heap of rubble.

Rescue workers and medical personnel bolted up Broadway and Church Street away from flying debris, concrete and smoke as ambulances began to scream from all directions, responding to the new collapse.

''Everyone started running,'' said Jonothan Schwartz, a Red Cross worker from Rockland County who stopped at last at Canal and Broadway. ''We were told there was more danger of another building falling. Everyone ran and ran -- kept going and didn't look back.

''I started running, and I didn't look back,'' Mr. Schwartz said. ''And I'm not going back. I'm going home, because it's too dangerous here.''

About the same time, the city's engineers yesterday expanded a safety zone around buildings that they believe had a greater chance of collapsing than earlier believed. Emergency personnel were temporarily evacuated from several blocks surrounding 1 Liberty Plaza at the southwestern edge of the World Trade Center.

Frantic calls to the police and Fire Department workers came from all directions, with reports of swaying buildings at John Street and the intersection of Greenwich and Liberty Streets.

Over at the West Side Highway, hundreds of people, frightened of falling debris, raced south, away from what they believed to be a collapsing building. They pushed past police barricades and dodged rescue equipment that was hastily being thrown into reverse. Many searched for a car to dive behind.

Firefighters and police officers led the stampede, struggling to race along streets thick with dust, empty water bottles, bits of metal and wire. Firefighters in heavy bunker gear yelled at colleagues, who stood looking toward a rolling pillar of smoke to move. ''Get out of here!'' screamed one investigator. ''Run! Run!''
The effect this safety hazard had on the surrounding rescue activity, both as an impending collapse, and then as it gave way, recreating the Pompeian conditions that existed the previous day of September 11th, needs to be completely reexamined.

Steinhauer starts off by saying officials "declared a zone of roughly eight more blocks in the area unstable," implying a major new limitation to rescue activities. Additional "precautionary evacuations" upset already "fragile search and recovery efforts." Ultimately, "the city's engineers yesterday expanded a safety zone around buildings that they believe had a greater chance of collapsing than earlier believed."

Steinhauer and her editor "fail the record" by neglecting to mention the approximate height of the secondary portion of the structure left to collapse that day---egregiously, since a mention is made of a nearby undamaged building, as being "1 Liberty Plaza, the 64-story high rise." That such a major event as this is so little known---if it is described, or cross referenced at all in the written record---is significant enough, but when combined with a total lack of photographic evidence, things become disturbing indeed.

Just as in the total absence of photographic evidence depicting the south face of Building 7 in flames, or simply unobscured by smoke even; or of any images depicting any fire in the fully engulfed 90 West Street, the historic Cass Gilbert tower just south of the complex, whose copper Mansard roof was burned through, one can surmise that rather than the "most photographed event in the history of the world," a strict site lockdown and control were in effect.

To my knowledge, only one image in the record depicts what may be this lower structure of Tower 2, unobscured by smoke. It appears out of the fog like a holy lignam in one of a series of extremely high-resolution shots taken by an apartment dweller, Aman Zafer, shots from his home along the Hudson river shoreline in New Jersey. I have always assume the picture was photoshopped to obscure something, which seems taller than the # 2 World Financial Center building in the foreground.

The Zafer vantage point was ideal to witness and record the events of September 11th. I hypothesize that the entire apartment complex site was developed with the eventuality of this day in mind, with only government-operative controlled lessees facing the river at least.

The image series contains some of the most unambiguous evidence extant showing destruction by a new method of weaponry---in which we see dense molecular matter like steel literally vaporizing midair into a distinctly colored dust. This technique was one of several other methods employed to destroy the towers.

In the image below, we can see snapped steel sections still maintaining a cross-check shape as they fold while turning into clouds of dust.

In Steinhauer's memorable phrase "the stalagmite remnants," of airborne steel are seen as dustifying before our eyes.

FEMA cameramen Jim Chesnutt and Kurt Sonnenfeld

I need to get this off my hard drive, if not my chest. I'm posting it here and I'll write it later on---or, if there's anybody in the house free, why don't YOU research it and write it up? I did the Google on the names a long time ago, so I'd have to start over. It is extremely rare to have any identifications in the photographic record on 9/11, so we can't just let these two slide. Just some more of your typical Christian fellowship types waiting for duty in a rumored upcoming war.

photo by Mike Reiger
They both add to the smarm quotient in any event. One of them I seem to remember, has publicity around Thai sex vacations he used to go on with his wife, and that's a new twist for me. No wonder the marriage-made-in-Heaven didn't last.

FEMA. If we had to rank the discredited federal agencies by order of their violation, where do you think FEMA fits in? Still near the top.

Signs of the Times has an interesting article about Kurt Sonnenfeld (but not Jim Chesnutt) with the wrong take on things.
Kurt Sonnenfeld - FEMA's WhistleBlower?

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

"Beyond Pearl Harbor" by Robert D. Novak Sept. 13, 2001 The New York Post

Thanks to Peter Duveen pduveen
"Beyond Pearl Harbor" by Robert D. Novak September 13, 2001 The New York Post

Security experts and airline officials agree privately that the simultaneous hijacking of four jetliners was an "inside job," probably indicating complicity beyond malfeasance. This makes all the more ominous Tuesday's national consequences.

Nobody was more vigorous Tuesday in demanding tough military reprisal against the terrorists than former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger. However, he was virtually alone in directing his rage not only at the assassins but also at security arrangements. "I thought we had solved that problem [of air skyjackings]," he said. He pointed out that effective air port security would have prevented the disaster that may exceed the 2,403 deaths in the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

The analogy with the Japanese surprise attack was drawn endlessly by political leaders and journalists. Former Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, with a keen sense of history, disagreed: "This, after all, was not Pearl Harbor. We have not lost the Pacific fleet." Unlike Dec. 7, 1941, the second day of infamy was not perpetrated by an enemy that at that time was militarily superior and seemed to put this nation's very existence in question.

In the rage and mourning following Tuesday's disaster, few officials wanted to dwell on how a 10-year hiatus of airline hijackings in this country could be followed by four in one hour. At a minimum, the blame can be put on ill-trained, incompetent personnel performing the screening of passengers. At the worst, security experts fear collusion with the terrorists, possibly even extending to the cockpit. This is a subject that the airlines are loathe to discuss.

The immediate consequence, widely predicted by members of Congress, will be tighter security making life more difficult for airline travelers and other Americans. The instant security measures taken in Washington and around the country came after the greatest terrorist success in world history had run its course and would not have been effective in preventing disaster had it been put in place.

Of greater interest to members of congressional intelligence committees is the surprise element of the attacks. The CIA and FBI are internally at a low point of effectiveness. "Human intelligence" spying has been in decline for decades. No amount of security harassment of airline passengers will substitute for effective intellegnce. Like Pearl Harbor, the lack of warning Sept.11 will be investigated.

Unlike Pearl Harbor, however, there is no clear foe. While secret briefings of members of Congress point to Osama bin Laden as the source of the attacks, President Bush's Tuesday night address to the nation named no names. The government, at this writing, actually is not sure. Private sources indicate that the terrorists could be a splinter group of Osama, its identity and whereabouts as yet unknown.

An attack on Afghanistan for sheltering Osama's terrorists will put the United States in danger of being perceived, however incorrectly, as launching a holy war against Islam. There is strong sentiment in Congress for hitting somebody, somewhere who has unsavory terrorist credentials even if not connected with Tuesday's attack.

With a crippled CIA unable to target the assassins, the Bush administration seems headed to deliver the same kind of hammer blows that the Clinton administration used in the Kosovo war rather than surgical strikes aimed at the assassins.

Perhaps the biggest difference with Pearl Harbor is the cause of the conflict. Bush's eloquent call for unity talked of the need to " defend freedom." Unlike Nazi Germany's and Imperial Japan's drive for a new world order, however, the hatred toward the U.S. by the terrorists is an extension of its hatred of Israel rather than world domination. Secretary of State Colin Powell's laudable efforts at being an even-handed peacemaker makes no difference to terrorists., the private intelligence company, reported Tuesday: "The big winner today, intentionally or not, is the state of Israel." Whatever distance Bush wanted between U.S. and Israeli policy, it was eliminated by terror.

The spectacle on television of Palestinian youths and mothers dancing in the streets of East Jerusalem over the slaughter of Americans will not be forgotten. The United States and Israel are brought ever closer in a way that cannot improve long-term U.S. policy objectives.

This is terribly significant in so many ways.

First, that a major article by a nationally famous columnist, in a big city tabloid, of the highest possible topical interest, filled with juicy and unique information, can be effectively squashed, suppressed from the prying eyes of researchers for over seven years now, by a media-intelligence-squashing complex of such vast power, we finally know their will to create reality by managing "truth" is real.

How about a scan of that other hard copy please, Peter Duveen, "AIMING' A JET IS 'VERY VERY EASY" It's my paranoia you understand. And how did he wind up as keeper of the gnostic articles?

The author, Robert Novak, must be aware of the special care and handling certain of his pieces receive. He'd have to get onboard even, wouldn't he? Like, not mentioning the discrepancies, or the smoking guns---even at the cost of sacrificing his reputation for prescient observations. And isn't it odd, that Novak also was the guy who outed career CIA agent Valerie Plame, by name,---under the direction of a corrupt White House cabal program.

Novak can be honest when he chooses to write forcefully: "There is strong sentiment in Congress for hitting somebody, somewhere who has unsavory terrorist credentials even if not connected with Tuesday's attack." Wow. Just wow.

"With a crippled CIA unable to target the assassins" is certainly new information, while " Unlike Nazi Germany's and Imperial Japan's drive for a new world order," constitutes a very high-level meme, much in needing of rehabilitating.

But look at the multiple layers of meaning hidden in his penultimate and final paragraphs. He reports on faked scenes of celebration, no less, which slander an already defeated people, who are dying under the gun this very day. He boosts this by his "Private sources" who indicate that the terrorists could be a splinter group of Osama, like Hamas, or the PLO, steering the retaliation to yet ANOTHER innocent country. What does that come to now Robert? Three innocent Muslim countries, or four? Oh yes! You stopped before Iran! Praise Jesus!

But all of that effort is then suppressed... One media, reporting on another media, who are themselves faking guilt by falsely manufacturing images, all of it squashed because of its tangential heavy burden of narrative anomalies.

Please Peter Duveen, could we have the full copy of the following article? You may be our last best chance.

OpEdNews » Columnist Robert Novak among first to link 9-11 and...
- 7:48am Dec 27, 2008 ... "AIMING' A JET IS 'VERY VERY EASY" (this was a banner headline over two pages) " 757s and 767's perfect picks for 'weapons" ... - 68k - Cached - Similar pages -

"Taking control of a big airliner and flying it into as precise a target as the World Trade Center is easier than most people would imagine, aviation experts said today."

"It's very, very easy to aim the plane," said a senior captain with a U.S. carrier. "It's not very difficult to get the experience you need. In three months, you can get a pilot's license."

September 13, 2001, New York Post, 'Aiming' a Jet is 'Very, Very Easy', 757s and 767s perfect picks for 'weapons', page 35,

Taking control of a big airliner and flying it into as precise a target as the World Trade Center is easier than most people would imagine, aviation experts said today.

"It's very, very easy to aim the plane," said a senior captain with a U.S. carrier. "It's not very difficult to get the experience you need. In three months you can get a pilot's license."

The aircraft types chosen by the terrorists --- a Boeing 757 and 767 -- seemed to have been perfect for wreaking maximum damage. The planes are commonly found on domestic routes, but are also relatively heavy, long-range jets that would deliver great kinetic energy on impact, along with tons of fuel.

Moreover, they are designed so that a pilot can easily learn to fly both of them.

"The 767 and 757, though they look different, their cockpits are identical," said the senior captain, who has 25 years of experience in the industry.

On takeoff, 1 767 weighs up to 160 tons, including 45 tons of kerosene-based jet fuel, which on impact instantly becomes an atomized high explosive. The 757 weighs up to 100 tons, including 30 tons of fuel.

Gaining control of the aircraft also appears easy to achieve.

Decades since the first hijackings, and the huge increase in airport security that followed them, analysts said expert terrorists could still smuggle arms aboard airliners without much risk of detection.

Tests have revealed that staffers conducting airport security checks routinely fail to detect weapons, said Chris Yates, editor of Jane's Aviation Security.

"In tests, screeners have consistently missed explosives and weapons being taken through the checkpoints," he said.

The security staffers often did not stay long enough to become expert at their jobs, he said.

"There is a hugely high turnover of staff at some airports -- up to 400 percent a year," Yates said. "Pay at McDonald's [hamburger restaurants] can often be more than what they get.

"The whole thing [security] has been a really sick joke."

Once aboard with weapons, suicide hijackers with piloting experience would find fewer problems than terrorists who needed the cooperation of the cockpit crew for an extended flight to some haven, another analyst said.

"Once they've got control of the passengers and cabin crew, which isn't hard with any kind of weapons, they can get rid of the guys in the cockpit, who are sitting there with their backs to the door," said Peter Harbison, of the Center for Asia Pacific Aviation in Sydney, Australia.

Cockpit doors are normally locked, but the pilot said they would not be difficult to kick down.


Monday, December 29, 2008

Magda Gabor

Someone got to me by doing an image search for magda gabor, so I tried it---and look what I found lying right on top.

It's Zsa Zsa, by the way, making the devil's-horns hand sign, with her sisters Magda and Eva synchronizing their smiles in 1955.

Very nicely coded indeed, with Zsa Zsa's break out performance. They apparently weren't as dumb as they put out. Now, let's see, who else do we know who hid a true face of evil behind a dumb public persona? Oh yes, George Bush.

I just can't seem to stop with the synchronicities either. What's up with that?

Now I am going to get twice the magda gabor traffic!

Saturday, December 27, 2008

Potsdam, Jellied Fire, Hiroshima and Cornell Historian Mark Selden

I have really bitten off a lot more than I can chew here. But I am working under an assumption that my lack of a scholarly background combined with an unfamiliarity with the literature, will empty the field where "Zen newcomer mind," can then grow the explication of this important central matter.

I am convinced, although I can't prove it yet, that embedded directly onto the surface of the historical record of the atomic blasts which befell Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II, will be a simple to perceive truth about responsibility and destiny, and that as our eyes open to it, we will be able to know this enormous new truth in our hearts and souls. I wouldn't claim to be smarter than anybody else, but I'd stack my ability to anchor and discharge the sort of "venom" that I see coming with the best working on the planet
(open in a new tab, and you'll have to throw in that extra, final "ist" yourself.)

By their fruits you shall know him. If the party line about the better behavior integral to the United States were true, we would be seeing vastly different lessons being learned then we do, with better outcomes, like something approximating everlasting peace. Instead, we see outcomes so opposite, and so repetitive, the ongoing endless wars of murderous aggression that continue to kill millions of innocent people across the planet. We can see this now in Iraq. So the wrong lesson was learned, from both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and from its western equivalent, the German holocaust against the Jews.

The holocaust against the Jews of Europe, while undeniable, is also morally untenable in its historical reality. It surely has been grossly exaggerated for political ends, then manipulatively misused for evil agendas, The spiritually unfolded fruit it left us with is the enthronement of militarism as a policy of "preemptive retaliation."

Luckily, other people are working in this important area of holocaust revisionism so that I don't have to face such a chilling task. And despite the extreme distortions and alterations to the record (the way "truth" could formerly be considered "subjective" by those willing to work relentlessly and mercilessly enough to alter it,) one series of videos pertaining to Buchenwald works much like I do, by noting the inconsistencies and the manipulation in the storytelling.

But in backtracking into a review of suicide terror attacks in Israel coincidental to 9/11, I began to realize that some of the most famously gruesome events---the real start to the second intifada, in the summer of 2001---coming with the devastating Dolphinarium disco attack, and the Sbarro pizza bombing, were in fact Jewish false-flag self-woundings, taken straight out of the play book of 9/11, and by that, I don't mean merely as agent provocateurs, but in the case of a another incident on September 5, 2001, which was the first case in which a supposed Palestinian was disguised as a Hasidim, was actually a self-suiciding Jewish culprit blowing himself up in a failed bid to kill other Jews. That is for another day---but be forewarned.

Might not the United States and England have given both Germany and Japan the incentives

Atlantic Charter Between Franklin Roosevelt & Winston Churchill

Joseph Stalin, Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill at Potsdam, July 26, 1945

Does anybody else see a strange disconnect between the photograph above and the first clause in the Potsdam Declaration: Proclamation Defining Terms for Japanese Surrender, below?
  1. We-the President of the United States, the President of the National Government of the Republic of China, and the Prime Minister of Great Britain, representing the hundreds of millions of our countrymen, have conferred and agree that Japan shall be given an opportunity to end this war.

In addition to the Potsdam Agreement, on July 26 Churchill, Truman and Chiang Kai-shek (the Soviet Union was not at war with Japan) issued the Potsdam Declaration which outlined the terms of surrender for Japan during WWII in Asia.

Check out this quote from a terrific essay about the changing ratio of military to civilian casualties, written by Mark Selden called, Before the Bomb: The “Good War,” Air Power and the Logic of Mass Destruction. I found it first at Michael Greenwell's wonderful blog.
"Public debate in the United States, Japan and Europe has long pivoted on the ethical and political issues associated with the U.S. decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. U.S. policy in general, and the final year of the Pacific War in particular, raises important questions of morality and war concerning the elimination of restraints on the killing of noncombatants during the preceding phases of a war which took more than 50 million lives. The totalism of the war was reinforced at the outset by American insistence that the only acceptable outcome lay in unconditional surrender of the enemy, a position that it maintained with respect to Japan until immediately after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, when it promptly softened its terms."
Excuse me? This is absolutely contrary to the history I was taught, which justified the atomic-bomb destruction as necessary for Japan's frenzied Generals to forgo their caves and ritual militarism. Otherwise, it was going to be a beach-to-beach, foxhole-to-foxhole slog for American fighters.

Since I've never surrendered a nation to invading forces before, I don't know the practical details, but I imagine there are lots of little legal technicalities to work out---like, who among the elites shall live? Why would we soften our terms after our display of power when we could have stiffened them? Were we suddenly feeling sorry for the Japanese? Did they surrender because of atom bombs, or because of better terms? Isn't this clear proof we didn't fully negotiate before we escalated---since we subsequently shifted our terms---and doesn't this make us much more morally corrupt?

But I submit, we didn't negotiate at all, which makes us corrupt indeed.

Elsewhere, Selden specifies that it was the "US softening of the terms of the Potsdam Declaration to guarantee the security of Hirohito," that was at issue, but my recollection of history doesn't postulate the Emperor as ever having any real power or authority to risk. It was the military leadership that mattered, so it's likely that an insider deal of much larger scope was under way. Otherwise, the logic here says a puppet dictator (nominally and ceremonially a figurehead guilty of war crimes?) was allowed to stay "on his throne," by design and intent, but under the condition that several hundred-thousand additional Japanese lives be sacrificed first. All to send a signal to a neighboring land, which was the real center of concern. Yes, this sounds right. It serves the apparent agenda of(temporarily) intimidating Stalin.

The Potsdam Declaration is a beautifully written but pointless preliminary presentation, and an obvious ploy to boot. The document's structural defect is its glaring omission--the lack of Russian participation. That originating failure in the power dynamic was rectified the day after Nagasaki, when the United States The Soviets were a part of the Allies after all. And this is not even hinted at in Wikipedia.

A proof is embedded directly on the surface of the historical record, waiting for the horrible moment when American eyes open to the panoply of her wrongs.

Read the Instrument of Surrender signed at Tokyo Bay, September 2, 1945, for the statement of principle arising out from the vanquished, and not a mandated "Proclamation Defining Terms for Japanese Surrender." As it spelled out, was the catastrophic force arrayed against Japan somehow thought to be unclear to its leadership? The previous six months had been a disaster for Japan:
"Between January and July 1945, the US firebombed and destroyed all but five Japanese cities, deliberately sparing Kyoto, the ancient imperial capital, and four others. The extent of the destruction was impressive, ranging from 50 to 60% of the urban area destroyed in cities including Kobe, Yokohama and Tokyo, to 60 to 88% in seventeen cities, to 98.6% in the case of Toyama. In the end, the Atomic Bomb Selection Committee chose Hiroshima, Kokura, Niigata, and Nagasaki as the pristine targets to display the awesome power of the atomic bomb to Japan and the world in the event that would both bring to a spectacular end the costliest war in human history and send a powerful message to the Soviet Union." from a May 07, 2007 essay by Mark Selden, A Forgotten Holocaust
Other than Kyoto, which was spared, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen to maximize the effects of the bomb's devastation. So such a powerful new weapon couldn't have been meant to intimidate the Japanese. The last cities could just as easily have been destroyed with incendiaries.

The official story, as told on every page of the Manhattan Project website, is a patently offensive scrim lie, making the supposedly gravely serious deliberations at Potsdam sound more like a contrived tea party than the raw assertion of behind-the-scenes power reality called for. For instance,
"The United States did know from intercepted messages between Tokyo and Moscow that the Japanese were seeking a conditional surrender. American policy-makers, however, were not inclined to accept a Japanese "surrender" that left its military dictatorship intact and even possibly allowed it to retain some of its wartime conquests."
Did it now? Why would Japan be negotiating a conditional surrender with a nation it was not at war with? Could this be some early shadow of coming a tactic, like "preemptive retaliation" by the Israelis? Did the Japanese Minister of War, and the heads of both the Army and the Navy, really think they could negotiate via the Soviet Union for an arbitration with the United States? The fact is,the U.S failed to undertake one word of surrender negotiation with Japan before the bombs fell, so any "possibilities and inclinations" discussed are the senseless ramblings of a schizophrenic.

A disconnect with reality can be glaring in the storytelling at the Manhattan Project website. For instance, they admit the never made a surrender proposal by direct communication with the Japanese:

"Prior to the atomic attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, elements existed within the Japanese government that were trying to find a way to end the war. In June and July 1945, Japan attempted to enlist the help of the Soviet Union to serve as an intermediary in negotiations. No direct communication occurred with the United States about peace talks, but American leaders knew of these maneuvers because the United States for a long time had been intercepting and decoding many internal Japanese diplomatic communications. From these intercepts, the United States learned that some within the Japanese government advocated outright surrender. A few diplomats overseas cabled home to urge just that."
Why do the Americans claim to have stayed informed through covert means, such as intercepts and decodings here? The whole point of Japan's initiative was supposedly to get the Soviet's to act as intermediaries with the Americans. Why didn't somebody just begin high-level talks at any point over the previous months? Nobody is telling us the truth here. They fail to provide even a cover story. (The Americans were supposedly intercepting Japanese transmissions remember---they could even initiated talks with the Soviets, if peace were truly their goal.) This is an enormous flaw in the kind of logical narrative normal people have. That this most serious record is riddled this way shows the U.S. lies, does what it wants, and its secret agents often are lost to ordinary reality.

And normal people are becoming more sophisticated picking up on it:
"Although Truman hoped that the atomic bomb might give the United States an edge in postwar diplomacy, the prospect of avoiding another year of bloody warfare in the end may well have figured most importantly in his decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan."
Oh how utterly bogus! Someone get a better writer! Truman didn't hope for an edge in diplomacy! He knew the atomic bomb promised to fundamentally alter every existing balance of power in his favor. Who knows what kinds of nefariousness this was stirring up in the empowered imaginations of covert America.

This unsigned, undated document seems to be key to answering some questions.

It is from the 'Records of Negotiations Related to the Acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration', and you won't find it linked to at the Manhattan Project website. It is document #9, and the first document in English in the collection. In it the Emperor of Japan accepting the terms of the July 26, 1945 Potsdam agreement, "with the United States, Great Britain and China, and later subscribed by the Soviet government," but with the caveat that it is understood that it "not comprise any demand which prejudices the prerogatives of his Majesty as a sovereign ruler." That sounds like it would stand up in court of law real well.

It asks the Government of Switzerland to act as intermediary, clearly implying that no other diplomatic channels were in existence. Truman had said he wanted to keep the Soviet's at arm's length, so why are they now brought onboard as signatories to the Declaration? Did they declare war on Japan two days before, just in order to now make peace?

The document begins by saying "the Japanese government asked several weeks ago the Soviet government, with which neutral relations then prevailed, to render good office in restoring peace vis-a-vis the enemy powers. Unfortunately, those efforts in the interest of peace, having failed..." This now makes sense of the the United States claim that it "did know from intercepted messages between Tokyo and Moscow that the Japanese were seeking a conditional surrender," but it also proves there was absolutely no contact between Japan and the drafters of the Joint Resolution, which makes the United States claim that "on July 29, 1945, the Japanese rejected the Potsdam Declaration," specious indeed.

This document is easy to date to August 10th, after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on the sixth and the ninth, because the official Manhattan Project webpage tells us that,
"The day after the attack on Nagasaki, the emperor of Japan overruled the military leaders of Japan and forced them to offer to surrender (almost) unconditionally."
But that "almost" is starting to look like a lot like a joke---additional evidence there never was an offer made, requiring any softening. So why is the august Manhattan Project: An Interactive History promulgating this canard?

The problem wasn't the Emperor's delay in asserting his authority---with both his generals and the U.S. It was the United States which had refused to negotiate with Japan on even a legally meaningless point about the Emperor's ceremonial role as the nation's titular head---until after they had already dropped the bombs---at which time the U.S. appeared to "gave in," losing a bit of face even, by calling it an "almost unconditional" surrender, but all of it this is looking more and more false. It's meaningless to begin with---even to Hirohito, who I'm sure had his prerogatives prejudiced plenty in the coming months.

And there never was a stumbling block about zealous war criminals refusing to give up.

The United States of America inaugurated the nuclear age by dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki based on nothing more than this furbelow of a diplomatic nicety, lasting the lifespan of a soap bubble.

This nicely frames my new understanding of the start of the war in the Pacific, which, regardless of the degree of "surprise" involved, had the United States militarily embargoing oil shipments to Japan; the island nation had a 90-day fuel supply, then its entire war machine and national economy would grind to a halt; and we should have anticipated what the reaction was going to be. I call that an antagonist forcing a protagonist's hand, with the Pearl Harbor attack being a "self-induced" emerging consequence, (and perhaps, perceptionally falsified in its telling, in the manner of 9/11.) A bid for justification for war---also, just like 9/11.

Friday, December 26, 2008

Harold Pinter Dies at 78, December 24, 2008


I am reminded of the death of John Boswell, the historian and Yale professor, on Christmas Eve, 1994, of AIDS, age 47. Boswell studied specifically issues of homosexuality and Christianity.

I acknowledged from this blog's first day the singular role Pinter's acceptance speech upon receiving the Nobel Literature Prize in 2005 had on my conscious "awakening" to the truth of 9/11, which started for me around Thanksgiving that year.

Something about the style and quality of his communication pierced my defenses. You know: the "yeah, the CIA overthrew the democratically elected government of Nicaragua, yeah, but." The tone of his expressed rage at the United States began a process lasting weeks that was akin to a hallucinogenic drug experience, which is my only answer to critics. I became lost in the nascent connections, and it took an ongoing commitment to feeling the deep pain of the moral horror. But then responsibility starts to get easier. I can't imagine how it feels on the other side.

I read it over and over again. It became my set piece for awhile. I did a magnificent dramatic interpretation of it at dinner parties---mine, at least. It took almost 15 minutes properly paced. I know I have wonderfully indulgent friends, and if no one got it the way I did, everybody saw how important it was to me.

As time when on, I began to learn to blog securely (having come a typical route on the internet, from sex through cash merchandising, to politics,) I experienced Google evolving along with me and I am so grateful to the Goohe/Gooshe/Gooit who supported and protected me in my isolation, with a long absence of positive feedback, which was a necessary predicate for original work. All would have been lost if Google had failed us.

Although I fancy I have a theater background, I knew next to nothing of Pinter's work before all this began---angry, straight Englishmen ranking rather far down on my list. Of course, the fact that he delivered it himself on videotape because he was dying was hugely influential to my sense of drama. I remember jealous commentators at the time, calling Pinter's poem 'Death,' which he quotes near the end, as being perhaps the worst poem in the English language, and they may be right! But what do you want from a poem called 'Death?' It works!

A perfect English couple: Harold Pinter with his wife, Lady Antonia Fraser, at Buckingham Palace in 1999.

Pinter closes by saying,
I believe that despite the enormous odds which exist, unflinching, unswerving, fierce intellectual determination, as citizens, to define the real truth of our lives and our societies is a crucial obligation which devolves upon us all. It is in fact mandatory.
If such a determination is not embodied in our political vision we have no hope of restoring what is so nearly lost to us---the dignity of man.
I delight in its sounding pretentious---I'll lay claim to the sentiment.

Say what you will, but StevenWarRan certainly found a voice, and at least, he loves his grammar.

A little card sits propped up at my computer:
"Those who have failed to work towards the truth have missed the purpose of living"
The Buddha
I don't believe people manning the Israeli security fence, or the NSA touch-screens, or the scalar weapons programs, or whatever, have the slightest idea what joyful energy this brings. God is becoming manifest on earth, I dare say. I hope his widow, Lady Antonia Fraser---and that would be Harold's, not God's---knows how deeply a piece of his writing affected me. My condolences to her on his loss.

Christmas 2008---50 degrees Fahrenheit

Friday, December 12, 2008

Danny Suhr: Former Quarterback & Brotherly Murder Victim

It is incomprehensibly demoralizing to read amongst the 503 transcripts of the oral histories of firemen, paramedics, and emergency medical technicians, as published by the New York Times, several which clearly and unequivocally place Fireman Danny Suhr's death about as far away removed from the location Father Mychal Judge died as it is possible to get and still be within the same World Trade Center complex.

How any member of the New York City Fire Department could feign a lack of knowledge of this discrepancy, wherein the stories of these two men's deaths have become somehow redacted into one self-serving lie, proves to my satisfaction that the New York City Fire Department members are key co-conspirators before the fact---in on the vast conspiracy of 9/11 as fully as any participant revealed, or as yet unrevealed.

And both Father Mychal Judge and Danny Suhr were murder victims, done in by their own "band of brothers."
The testimony of Captain Paul Conlon gives the fullest "official" version of Suhr's demise.

Conlon gave out the riding positions for Engine 216, with the help of Dan Suhr, who was the senior man working that day. Suhr had the control (or "hookup" as he called it, according to Conlon,) Ted Murray was the chauffeur, "Chris" was the nozzle, Tony Sanseviro was the backup, and John Johnson was a proby. "I gave him the door---he was going to be our fifth man," says Conlon.

They find Chief Barbara. He was south of the South Pedestrian Bridge, so he was somewhere along West Street between Albany and Liberty. Barbara directs the men to the lobby command post inside the entrance of Tower 2.
"Engine 216 was kind of leading the way with 205 and 217 right behind us...We get about halfway there, with no companies in front of us and Dan Suhr gets hit with a jumper. He was right to my right and behind me. It was as if he exploded. It wasn't like you heard something falling and you could jump out of the way. He gets hit... We both say, let's get him underneath the scaffolding across the way on the north side of 90 West Street, at that time there was scaffolding up."

"So we go to pick him up. He's big guy. Other firemen stopped to help us pick him up. I didn't know who at that time. I've heard who since. I think all of 205 Engine stopped to help us pick him up and think two members of 217 stopped to help us. I don't know who helped actually pick him up or who helped do other stuff. We were taking his coat off. We were picking him up. Someone picked up his helmet and things like that.

"Called Engine 216 to command post Mayday. I have member with life-threatening injury. One of the guys says he still has a pulse. They took his pulse right on the ground there. We got him under the scaffolding.

"When I called the Mayday I also called for an ambulance at West and Liberty because they couldn't have gotten an ambulance any closer to us. I didn't realize where Liberty was really. I thought I was at Liberty. I guess was at Albany. I called for the ambulance. I called the Mayday. We get him under the scaffolding, two guys come running up with a long board, two firemen came running up with an orange long board. They must have gotten it off their rig. Think they were from 217.

"We put the long board down. We put him on the long board. We take off his coat, and his mask, whatever wasn't off already. The guys were doing CPR. The ambulance came up pretty quickly. They came running down the bloc, two medics, or they might have been EMTs. They were medics.

"Two medics came running down the block with stretcher. They put the stretcher down. We picked up the long board, put it on, we strap him on. One of the medics opens up his bag and starts going through his protocol. He's starting to take out syringes, you know. I said to him, "Let's just get him to the hospital," because, very often they go through that protocol and it takes a long time." He said, "Yeah, you're right," so he closes up his bag.

"We wheel him to the ambulance, and put him in the ambulance. As we were putting him in, as the guys were putting him in, I called again, "216 to command post for police escort." Because it took us a long time, we hit lot of traffic getting there and I just pictured them having trouble getting out of there.

"Right as I called for it, a highway cop---I talked to Chief Barbara again. A highway cop comes by and I flag him down. He comes shooting over. I tell him what we want to do. I didn't know where they were going yet. I asked the EMT, "where are you going?" He said, "St. Vincent's." I went back and said "They're going to St. Vincent's." Is that all right? So he winds his way in front of the ambulance.

"When I got back to the ambulance, Dr. Kelly was in there. I don't know where she came from. She's still kind of just about about stepping out. She's looking at him. She goes to step out. I help her down. She looked at me, gave me a shake of the head like he's not going to make it.

"Two guys from 216 are in there doing CPR and I closed the doors and the ambulance takes off. I look around and its me and the proby that's the only guy that's left. I look at our gear where we dropped it, which is between us and the entrance. I think we can get that in minute..."
Meanwhile, Firefighter Christopher Patrick Murray from the 205, reports,
"At this time we witnessed a lot of jumpers, a lot of debris falling off of the building. I don't know if you want to talk about Danny Suhr because we eventually got involved with Danny Suhr.

"Question: Who is that?

"Murray: He's another fireman. I think he's from 216, but I'm not sure. Danny Suhr, it's rumored he got hit by a jumper.

"Question: You tell me everything. This will help us.

"Murray: Standing on West Street across from Liberty, watching the jumpers, we saw a jumper come off the south side of the south tower, which would be the side facing Liberty Street, say on the cross street, a good distance to the southeast corner of this parking lot, which would actually be the Northwest corner of Cedar and Washington, which is where Danny Suhr and his company, which, again, I believe was 216, they were forming up to make their way to the towers. Danny Suhr got struck. Approximately a half a minute to a minute later we came upon the scene, stopped to help Danny Suhr, dropped our roll-ups, grabbed a bunch of EMT's . There were other companies there. The companies I remember were 122. Somebody said 217, but I don't remember seeing them, which, again, doesn't mean they weren't there. There were probably about 20 firemen trying to help Danny.

"We were there for about five minutes. We helped Danny get loaded into the bus, went back, reformed, grabbed our roll-ups, put our Scotts back on, started walking north on Washington Street."
Murray never mentions the names of the other members from the 205.

Then, Firefighter Joseph Meola from the, as yet unmentioned 91st, reports that:
"We went into the quarters of 10 and 10. After we were in the quarters for approximately 30 seconds -- it was a triage center at the time. After we left 10 and 10, as soon as we walked outside the door, a firefighter from an engine company 2 -- I believe it's 216, Danny Suhr, just outside 10 and 10's quarters on Liberty Street, got hit by a jumper.

"They were pulling him away. I believe they got him into an ambulance, and they were yelling at us to get away, because jumpers were jumping from the south tower onto Liberty Street, and a few jumpers came close to us, but no -- we met up with another company, Engine 58, which is in our battalion, which was in the 12th battalion.

"I believe they were on Liberty at the time. I don't know if they were going in the building. I don't remember, but they did make their way into the building before us, not building -- not Tower 2, but Tower 3. The Vista, Marriott. They made it into the Vista before us after -- later on."
"10 and 10," is the FDNY Ten House, Engine Company 10 and Ladder Company 10. It is at 124 Liberty Street. Both Meola and Murray describe locations around 200 feet away from World Trade Tower facade and its jumpers---but in opposite directions from each other! Conlon says his company was heading toward Tower 2 and got "about half way there," which might imply somewhere in the middle of Liberty Street, but still well north and west of either of the other two. This level of inconsistency in the narrative supports my supposition that the story of Suhr's death is entirely a fabrication, without any factual basis whatsoever.

For the record, Father Judge died in the lobby of Tower 1, four blocks north on Vesey Street, and not on Liberty Street---many hundreds of feet away from the three disparate sites mentioned in these testimonies.

"Chris," Tony Sanseviro, "Ted" Murray, and John Johnson did not give oral testimonies of their experiences from that day.

But "backup" Tony Sanseviro testified at the "trial of confessed al-Qaida conspirator" Zacarias Moussaoui, that his "close friend"---his "buddy"---his "fellow firefighter," Danny Suhr," was struck and killed by a body falling from the World Trade Center's burning north tower on Sept. 11."

Now Sanseviro says he "struggles with 'survivor's guilt.'"

Of course, Suhr could have been done in almost anywhere, given the complicity of the men in the 205, 216, and 217 companies, who are telling their stories or keeping their secrets. Along with the 91rst. And the 122, 207 and the 209th.

Very much like the treatment of Father Judge as seen in photographs and videotape from that day, the photograph below, entered into evidence in the Moussaoui trial, of a wounded firefighter being yanked or dragged, is absolutely appalling in my opinion. Is this how firemen rescue one of their own brothers who has been struck by a leaping and falling body and who likely had damage done to his helmeted head, neck and spine?

That these men could be so oblivious to reality, to common sense, to decency, is a major proof to my way of thinking that Suhr was murdered in an out-of-the-way location, and then dragged somewhere closer to the action, but not close enough to the base of the building for legitimacy---or consistency.

And Danny Suhr was no ordinary fireman. He happened to be the quarterback of the New York City fire department football team, and as such, I submit, he was likely to have been picked as a necessarily visible sacrificial victim---one of only two such public parts in the entire epic New York narrative. Dead by dint of departmental notoriety, in other words, his execution apparently not very well executed, even as a stand-alone component. But when combined to serve as the plot device killing the only other publicly featured player planned for that day, Father Mychal Judge, here we can say, hope sprung eternal.

I believe that Danny Suhr was whacked by fellow brothers from within his band of New York's Bravest. Bada bing, bada boom.

Captain Paul Conlon's testimony is also useful to see how the case of the disappearing Chief is handled. Chief Barbara literally disappears that day, and everyone in the department knows this to be the case.
"Conlon: "When I mentioned Chief Barbara, he asked me, "When did you see him last?" And I told him.

"Questioner: That was my next question. Where did you see Chief Barbara last?

"Conlon: I last saw him at the command post. Where he set the command post up, it was just north of Albany. There's a building there. One Financial Center. It was right at the corner of that building, his command post, and it was on the west side of West Street. This is West Street here, not really the West Side Highway.

"The command post was just north of the corner of One Financial Center when I walked up to him. There was kind of a natural place to have a command post. There was a cutout, decorative concrete or something right there. So he was standing there.

"Question: That would have been just prior to the collapse then?

"Conlon: Well, when we reported in to him, he was there when I called for an ambulance. I'm assuming he was there, but I didn't see him there. But when it collapsed we were closer to the building than that location, so I don't think he was there.

"I thought about it a lot afterwards. He must have walked towards the lobby command post. That's all I can assume. You know what I mean? Like, were walking into the lobby command post. He must have been behind us walking in or something.

"After we put Dan into the ambulance and the ambulance took off, basically the building collapsed. We were at the corner, right at 90 West Street. The command post is across the highway and a little further south than where we were.

"That doesn't mean that he didn't get----he hasn't been found, though, I guess, so he couldn't have been there. If he was there, they would have found him, because there wasn't a whole lot of debris there, I know from afterwards. There was some steel.

"That's where I reported in to him, Chief. I reported in to him at his command post, which was on the west side of West Street just north of the corner of One World Financial Center That's the last place I saw him."
EMT Richard Erdy, an EMT tech with the city fire department's Battalion 52, along with his female partner named Solano, transported Suhr to the hospital. When the interviewer asks "what hospital," Erdy responds, "I believe it's Bellevue," implying that he isn't quite sure.

Erdy says that Dr. Kelly and an unnamed medic "walked in" to their ambulance, gravely shaking their heads to indicate the seriousness of his condition. Then two unnamed members of Suhr's Engine 216 (that would be "Chris" and Tony Sanseviro,) accompanied them on the ride.

Erdy says
"You could tell his neck was snapped because every time you hit a bump, a head don't have that type of movement."
which seems odd. Why didn't they secure Suhr in a neck brace? For what it's worth, Erdy says the scene was well documented:
"This photographer is there. I'll tell you one photographer probably didn't make it because that one definitely would have made the news because he was right in the guy's face."
That at least explains the image of Suhr being dragged by fellow firemen.

How sick and how sad to see heroes brought so low. To see them posing for the tourist's camera's, striking poses like seasoned models, makes my skin crawl. May God forgive them all.

September 08, 2002, New York Daily News, NO REPLACING 6 WHO WENT DOWN TOGETHER, Those left behind know men of Ladder 118 were side by side, by Michele McPhee,

Monday, December 08, 2008

Ricky Flores & Lori Grinkler: The Jew and the Puerto Rican

In addition to the world-famous image shot by Thomas Franklin of three New York City firemen raising an American flag amid the tumult of Ground Zero on the afternoon of September 11th, 2001, two other professional photographers happened to snap an image of the same scene. Freelancer Lori Grinker, from the agency Contact Press Images, and Ricky Flores, staff photographer for The Journal News of Westchester, captured almost exactly the same moment, albeit from a different angle and vantage point, which alas for them, did not become a penny stamp.

Her page at Contact with the "selected" image:

Ricky Flores' image, seen below, was used to illustrate an article in The Digital Journalist, titled America's Darkest Day by David Friend, which went online on Oct. 13, 2001; and on a National Press Photographers Association page, 'Witness To Tragedy,' which coincidentally also was posted online on Oct 13, 2001. His work never seems to have made it into his actual employer, The Journal News.

I find both of these photographer's work to be suspect because Flores has only this single image taken on 9/11 in the record, as available on Google, while Grinker has all of only two images, the flag-raising, and the image below, which was used as a home-page illustration for the year 2001 by her agency, Contact Press Images, on a page which made its first appearance online on Sep 03, 2004 according to

(Too bad Fireman Balducci doesn't offer us a testimony. I'd be interested in what he has to say.)

The purpose of Flores' and Grinker's images, in my opinion, would be to buttress and support the truly iconic, but sadly fraudulent, work of Thomas Franklin, who was traveling around Ground Zero that day with the award-winning photographer James Nachwey, who somehow missed the shot.

Grinker's work helps us place the scene as taking place to the west of West Street, directly in front of WFC 2; however, in her second shot she is clearly on the second floor and Franklin says he took his shot from the street shooting upwards, so I suppose Grinker traveled to a higher floor to get the image of the firemen.

Contact Press Images says,
"Based in New York, Lori Grinker began making her way to the site of the destruction moments after the crash of the first plane. By the time she arrived both towers had collapsed and the entire area had been transformed into a smoldering field of ruins. From the second floor of the still standing World Financial Center, Grinker noticed a group of firemen hoisting an American flag while she was photographing the wreckage. The selected image has since become iconic, symbolizing resilience in the face of adversity."
We can know this to be false to a high degree of certainty because of the numerous reports of a perimeter being established before this time by law enforcement. Even the privileged Franklin says he was almost arrested a half dozen times that day. It is unlikely if the uncredentialed Grinker made it into a damaged office building beside the collapsed World Trade Center towers to take all of two images. Her agency bio states:

"Lori Grinker was born in 1957 in Freeport, New York, USA. While still a student at Parsons School of Design, she began her photographic career documenting the rise of the 13-year old future heavyweight championship boxer Mike Tyson. She joined Contact Press Images in 1988. Since then, in addition to her reportage of events such as the destruction of the World Trade Center, she has delved into long-term book projects including The Invisible Thread: A Portrait of Jewish American Women (Jewish Publication Society), and most recently, Afterwar: Veterans from a World in Conflict (de.MO 2004), her 16-year project on veterans of the last century. She is based in New York City."

The NPPA article says Flores, like Grinker, was far away when the planes crashed:

"I was on the Bronx-Manhattan bridge crossing trying to get past cops who were redirecting traffic away from Manhattan when the first tower fell. I finally found one who let me pass and as the second building fell and overwhelming sense of despair and shock began to set in. Around Canal Street NYPD had already begun to setup some sort of perimeter to the site.

I was able to park and find a way in. I remember the utter chaos around the perimeter, with a host of emergency vehicles making it's way down towards the World Trade Center. I also remember that past that point somewhere between that perimeter and the actual site that the streets were completely empty and silent and covered with this chalky white dust."
But Flores makes explicit he was on the second floor, leaving Franklin to crawl into a low ditch somewhere:

"When I took the photo of the firemen raising the flag in front of the World Financial Center from a second floor window, it felt like it was the bare glimmer from the rescue workers that they were beginning to get a grasp and a comprehension of what had taken place. I knew that what I saw was different from everything else that I saw that day, but if you had asked me if it was the most significant I would not have been a been able to give you an answer."

I guess not. In addition to David Friend's page, Ricky Flores has a page at The Digital Journalist called REFLECTIONS New York City, from August 2003, where even the photographer gets photographed. The piece unfortunately for Flores uses the Jayson Blair scandal as a literary device.

Another piece about Flores, in the Boricua News, called, Witness to Tragedy, from December 2001, would have appeared more professional had they spelled "Photograher," correctly.

Given the admittedly limited reach of Google research, as the public record now stands, it is absurd that these two were supposedly on the scene on 9/11 and only came away with these measly images, meant as a sort of validation of another low-rent screw-ball insider news photographer. Further damnation of the entire profession of "non-fiction" photography---as if we needed any more proof of their cupidity and guile. Phooey I say!
There is no angle or shot as composed in the Thomas Franklin picture. It is entirely a product of Photoshop. The same is true of the Grinker and Flores images. Manufactured frauds beyond a reasonable doubt.

On edit 1/4/09: Please see The "Suppressed" History of Thomas Franklin's "Instant" Symbol for further complications to the story, which only serve to strand the Lori & Ricky Show on the second floor of Number Two World Financial Center shooting at the dusty breeze.

In an article in the New Jersey News on October 2, 2001, Flag in noted photo flying on ship leading U.S. fleet, staff writer Elise Young writes,
Franklin was near the trade center's ruined Building Seven when he spotted Firefighters Dan McWilliams, George Johnson, and Billy Eisengrein raising the flag on a pole plucked from a yacht. The men had anchored the flagpole in rubble about 20 feet above West Street.
She goes on to say, "McWilliams said he and other rescuers were frustrated after digging for six hours and finding no survivors." This is of course, completely bogus, as no search or rescue was undertaken until Building 7 collapsed at 5:30pm, and until the remains of Tower Two were blown 24 hours after that. No digging. No bucket brigades. I suppose these three firemen could be credited with abstaining from their fellow's massive, wholesale looting, which was what the firemen really did under cover of darkness.

Sunday, December 07, 2008

I Vant to Suck Your Blood

If there are necrophiliacs in the Justice Department, could vampires lurk nearby?

Well, given the "blood meme" from September 11th, 2001, I think it at least fair we ask what became of all those extra liters of A+ and O-.

So many preposterous requests for blood donations were put out by the media on 9/11, the effect of which can easily be imagined, that in hindsight, we can see the insincerity and calculation behind the talking point and now realize it as a decoding shibboleth.

The award for Worst Actor Jonesing for Blood in a Television Appearance goes to Health and Human Services Director Tommy Thompson, speaking on CNN at 7:22pm*
"Americans all over are calling up and asking what they can do. The best thing that they can do is respond to this great call, by volunteering to give blood. We need Americans to continue to answer that call. No matter where you live, please, do your civic duty and assist us by donating blood Because our primary job is to ensure that Americans harmed by this tragedy get the help that they need."
I used to have an extensive image file on my hard drive depicting numerous publicity seeking politicians, and others, with a sleeve rolled up, but the file is long gone to hacking. As I come across interesting new references, I'll plop them here.

Tommy Thompson needs to go wherever they put Christy Todd Whitman---like the naval brig in Charleston, South Carolina, for a good long period of deep isolation. I want to break their personalities and find out what they did with all that plasma. Glug. Glug.

*[EDT (09:18/41:41) CNN Sept. 11, 2001 7:13 pm - 7:55 pm (September 11, 2001)]

Major Television Networks Suspend Competition at the Suggestion of 60 Minutes Producer Don Hewitt 'Share Footage of 9/11 Terrorist Attacks'

If you go to the index page for the complete coverage of CNN's "War on Terrorism," and click through the 31 articles archived under the "September 11" bullet, (many of them are actually dated September 12th,) only one won't open---
Devastation unfolds on national television.

That story was posted to the CNN web site at 8:31pm EDT and its web address would indicate it comes from the CNN program Showbiz Tonight. A copy of the bullet item is still available at

There are a couple of interesting items in the story, but I think if the piece was technically suppressed for some reason, it was because of this statement:
"The major television networks suspended competition, agreeing to share all footage gathered during the terrorist attacks and their aftermath, on suggestion of "60 Minutes" creator Don Hewitt."
This is exactly the sort of contribution I would make to The Complete 9/11 Timeline if I could ever figure out how to post an entry there. In my defense, they don't make contributing easy.

The entire AP article on a CNN page as maintained only at

Devastation unfolds on national television

September 11, 2001 Posted: 8:31 PM EDT (0031 GMT)

CNN anchor Aaron Brown watched along with a nation the WTC destruction
CNN anchor Aaron Brown watched along with a nation the WTC destruction

NEW YORK (AP) -- Television became a national gathering place on a terror-filled Tuesday, replaying unimaginable scenes of a plane crashing into the World Trade Center and its skyscrapers collapsing. Newspapers rushed out special editions. Many headlines said simply: "TERROR."

When the first of two planes hit the Manhattan landmark shortly before 9 a.m., it set in motion an extraordinary effort by the media to tell the story.

Catastrophes unfolded as fast as television could detail them: a plane plunging into the Pentagon, a crash in Pennsylvania, buildings evacuated across the country.

Commentators tried to keep calm. "This is the most serious attack on the United States since Pearl Harbor," said NBC's Tom Brokaw.

Newspapers across the country put out extras. For The Morning Star of Wilmington, N.C., it was the first special edition since the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The Wall Street Journal evacuated its headquarters four blocks from the World Trade Center, but planned Wednesday's edition with staffers working from home or a technical center in New Jersey.

Internet traffic slowed under the demand of people seeking information online. The Internet search engine Google directed news seekers to get off the computer and turn on radio or television.

With television cameras trained on a smoking tower of the World Trade Center after the first attack, viewers were able to see the chilling sight of the second plane crashing into the other tower and exploding in a fireball. Television also carried, live, the collapse of both towers into a pile of rubble.

As the morning progressed, networks showed footage of New Yorkers running from the scene, some bloodied or covered with ash. Streets looked white with ash and soot, a scene Brokaw likened to "a nuclear winter."

A victim was seen hurtling through the air from the World Trade Center in footage shown on CBS. The landing was obscured.

CNN showed a flight-path simulator that detailed how a plane headed west from Boston took a sudden, sharp turn south near Albany and headed down the Hudson Valley toward New York City.

Don Dahler, an ABC News correspondent, was in his apartment four blocks from the World Trade Center when he heard the first plane hit. He called "Good Morning America" and was immediately put on the air.

"It sounded a lot like a military missile," Dahler said. "There was a high, shrieking sound followed by a roar then a huge explosion. I knew immediately something terrible had happened."

The major television networks suspended competition, agreeing to share all footage gathered during the terrorist attacks and their aftermath, on suggestion of "60 Minutes" creator Don Hewitt.

A shaken Ashleigh Banfield on MSNBC described debris showering around her. CNBC correspondent Ron Insana, his suit smeared with gray ash, told how he ran for cover and hid in a parked car when a tower collapsed.

"I've never seen anything like this," a breathless and sobbing Banfield said. "This whole place looks like a war zone. When the cloud came out I could feel the force of it."

CBS News correspondent Carol Marin was a block away from the World Trade Center when the second tower collapsed. A nearby firefighter grabbed her and they ran away, Marin kicking off her heels. She was thrown against a wall, the firefighter protecting her with his body as smoke and debris blinded them.

"I am grateful to be alive and am awestruck at the people who are down there," Marin said.

A Fox News Channel producer who is trained as an emergency technician, Dan Cohen, said he rushed to the scene and twice had to run for his life as the towers collapsed. He was later stationed at a makeshift hospital at Chelsea Piers, on the television set where the NBC drama "Law & Order" is produced.

"It now looks like the show 'M.A.S.H.,"' Cohen said.

One expert on terrorism suggested that the second plane to hit the World Trade Center was timed deliberately to be captured by television cameras already focused on the buildings after the initial attack.

"It was meant to be right before our eyes," said Joan Deppa, a Syracuse University professor and author of "The Media and Disasters: Pan Am 103." "This was staged like it was a TV show."

Most local New York TV stations, except for WCBS, were knocked off the air when their transmitters atop the World Trade Center were destroyed. All the stations' signals, however, could be seen over cable systems in the New York area.

It was not immediately clear how many New Yorkers were blocked from television coverage of the events. Roughly two-thirds of the nation's television homes get cable or satellite.

CNN aired videophone pictures Tuesday evening of explosions in Kabul, Afghanistan. A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the U.S. was not attacking and that the fighting appeared to be rocket attacks by Afghan rebels opposing the ruling Tali ban.

With so many events happening at once, Fox News Channel ran a continuous crawl of news bulletins summarizing the series of events.

C-SPAN took phone calls from shaken citizens. One caller from California said: "This is a sign to America: We think we are the strongest country and they hit us; they knew where to hit us."

Other networks suspended normal programming. The ESPN sports networks showed ABC News reports, VH1 showed CBS News programming, TNT and TBS showed CNN coverage. News networks dispensed with commercials for continuous coverage.

The shopping networks QVC and ShopNBC network went dark. "We share with our customers and employees, our sadness as well as our thoughts and prayers," ShopNBC said in a message on the screen.

CNN lost its main transmitters. Aaron Brown anchored the network coverage from Penn Station, his back to where the World Trade Center had been.

MSNBC's Brian Williams took note of the city's tragically altered skyline: "As it was more than 30 years ago, the Empire State Building is once again the city's tallest structure."

Copyright 2001 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

(There is a highly edited version of this article, 22 minutes later in the timeline, titled

Chaotic scene of devastation unfolds on national television

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer

Tuesday, September 11, 2001
Last modified at 8:53 p.m. on Tuesday, September 11, 2001
© 2001 - The Lubbock Avalanche-Journal

I wonder if this means that the article was up for 22 minutes before the super-editor realized how actionable the information was and had it altered and much trimmed down.)