Kevin Sutavee, Freelance Cameraman, Publisher of Prophecy Magazine
makes some important and privileged videotape of the destruction at ground zero following the attacks of September 11th, 2001. His is the first view of the carnage on the ground at the World Trade Center site that viewers of the ABC network will see, at 4:09 in the afternoon---taped, Sutavee says, "not even" one hour before.
Sutavee narrates for the 3:10 minutes of tape, explaining what is being seen to viewers and the ABC anchor, Peter Jennings, who thanks him, saying, "we're grateful as a news organization, that you decided to bring that video in here." Sutavee's camerawork is jerky, as he pans up, down and across a depopulated landscape of smoke and steel. We see only two figures---one, he tells us, is a friend he ran into there, also taking pictures. Another is a Russian-speaking rescue worker looking for friends.
As Sutavee's 9/11 footage ends, the ABC control room fails to edit out a brief glimpse of a party scene, which apparently Sutavee taped previously and was copying over on 9/11. This light-hearted moment---thank goodness it wasn't homemade pornography being overwritten---causes Jennings to go off-topic, asking him about when and where the party took place.
Jennings then interviews Sutavee in the studio for a period longer than the just-concluded 3:10 minutes of trade center videotape, finally asking him, "Can I just get one other thing clear? You managed to get right onto the site itself, right onto the top of one of the two towers. But I couldn't see any police, I couldn't see any fire department."
Sutavee answers the question clumsily, waving his arm nonsensically to indicate where fire, police and rescue workers were relative to his position, while repeating how still and silent the atmosphere was there.
Jennings then cuts to the talking head of George Stephanopoulos, asking him archly, "weren't you a bit surprised George, to see nobody in there besides young Mr. Sutavee?" Stephanopoulos is forced to agree, but he reaches for a likely excuse for the lack of activity, such as fear of asbestos contamination---a concern, which if true, unfortunately evaporated by the end of the day.
But suddenly, as Stephanopoulos is speaking, ABC begins televising additional footage attributed to Sutavee of an entirely different nature. These scenes are heavily populated with myriad rescue workers heartily, if not purposefully, moving about. Sutavee even amends his description of the ambient decibel level---where before he said he could only hear "crackling and pops and stuff," or "glass breaking," now he says, "ambulances are crushed, lights are still going, horns are, you know, still blowing."
Sutavee doesn't seem nearly as comfortable narrating this footage. When Jennings' quickly asks him, "Kevin, just tell us, where this is, what is this?" Sutavee responds, "It's on the West End Highway, and, um, I can't remember the other street. You can't tell, you really can't tell, but it's right there, where the South Tower was, where the Marriott was."
Why does Sutavee speak more precisely this second go around, saying it was 200 firemen deaths he was told about by a fireman on the scene? How could such a count be generated five hours after the attacks and why would a department member share the fact with an outsider at this stage? Did that number arise because the strategic plan had 200 firemen undergoing mock martyrdom? Where did they actually go? Rendition under the Denver Airport?
Why does Stephanopoulos throw out a canard, reporting that the first "temporary hospital and morgue," "several blocks long" was being established at Chelsea Piers, when doctors and nurses at the close-by St. Vincent's Hospital were standing around twiddling their thumbs, waiting for patients, like in these two images from 9/11?
Was it for the same reason of escalating our national fear and terror that led ABC's John Miller to say earlier in the day that there were so many serious burn victims that they were being sent off to hospitals in Canada?
Perhaps Sutavee's story of accessing the Trade Center site would have been credible in the confusion of the first hour after the attacks---but is it believable five hours later? Wasn't Manhattan below Canal Street shut down, with a secure perimeter established around the disaster zone well before then?
Also, why does Sutavee twice mention possible editing to his video tape, saying of a friend, "they probably edited him out," and in different instance, "I don't know if they edited it out yet?" If ABC editors were making cuts, wouldn't Sutavee have said "you," or "your," in reference to edits?
The extended Sutavee interview and tape replay was nicely punctuated when Jennings follows it up with a report that "a Korean Airlines plane was forced down by U.S. and Canadian forces over White Horse Bay in Canada earlier today; that Canadian television reports that Canadian forces on the ground stormed the plane." If this report was untrue, and I believe it to be false, where did rumor mongering like this get its start? The 9/11 record is replete with further examples of such media manipulation.
A total of 18 recognizable bodies were retrieved from Ground Zero after the attacks of 9/11.
The entire Sutavee interview is 9:30 minutes long, with his tape running another minute. You can watch the ABC News coverage on this thread. It starts the 4:09 pm - 4:51 pm EDT segment
(11septembervideos has the full version up on YouTube, but says to me, "You cannot favorite a user who
The full video, embedded below, from the indispensable archive.org, comes with an added bonus: It is apparent that the whole 9/11 image and video corpus has been seriously photoshopped in regards to obscuring smoke effects. This is most clear in the extant images of the south face of Building 7, all of which have a uniform electrostatic quilting of white smoke emitting from every window of the south face, while the other three facades remain nearly pristine.
In Sutavee's tape, the Deutsch Bank Building, and 90 West Street fade in out of spectral existence. We can't see across the site to Building #7 at all.
Conclusive proof of the heavy effort to disguise he truth of the wreckage is offered by the reappearance of Jennifer Steinhauer's New York Times article from September 13, 2001, 'As Remnants Collapse, Workers Run For Cover,' the single-source media recording the fact that "stalagmite remnants of the fallen World Trade Center towers collapsed entirely yesterday," when "the steel and concrete wreckage of the south tower...crumpled to the ground in the late afternoon," creating yet another "rolling pillar of smoke." This two-stage collapse is entirely missing from the image record.
Also, check out the 06:28 moment in this segment. See if it doesn't appear to you as if the sharp vertical edge of a phantom skyscraper can be discerned for a fleeting millisecond. Since Steinhauer and her Times' editors fail to inform us of the height of Tower 2's carry-over remnants, we'll have to guess if these might be them.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete