Monday, December 14, 2009

Rudulph Giuliani & Bernard Kerik

What could be said about these two that hasn't already been said before?

Well, there is this odd mention in Kerik's weekly report to the mayor from September 27, 2001, about the "partial collapse" of the 64-story office building at # 1 Liberty Plaza, a day after three towers were destroyed on 9/11
"Because of known suspected or potential structural damage to other buildings, most mass transit service was suspended south of 14th Street at 9:03 a.m. on September 11. This precaution proved prudent when on Tuesday, September 12, 1 Liberty Plaza experienced a partial collapse In addition to the total destruction of 1 and 2 World Trade Center, and the partial collapse'of [sic] 1 Liberty Plaza, buildings 3, 5 and 7 World Trade Center were also destroyed."
The official sounding prose is from a document I found posted at called, The Police Commissioner of Mew York [sic] September 27, 2001 Memorandum to: From: Subject: Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani Police Commissioner Bernard B. Kerik WEEKLY REPORT and it makes for gripping reading. A link there, NY B33 NYPD Weekly Reports to Giuliani Fdr- 9-27-01 Report, doesn't seem to be working at the moment, but the
Cached version does, and I've also backed up the piece here.

For anyone who has studied the record of the September 11th attacks, this reference to an otherwise unknown partial collapse of a 64-story high steel frame structure is exceeding strange, especially coming from such a high-level official.

Earlier in the document, Kerik had given details for the three unprecedented and historic building collapses from September 11th, giving both the structure's height, in stories, and the time of the building failures,
"Structural damage from the initial plane strikes, coupled with subsequent fires fed by jet fuel from the ruptured fuel tanks, resulted in the complete structural failure of both 110-story, 1,350 foot high buildings. The South Tower, 2 World.Trade Center, collapsed without warning at approximately 10:00 a.m., while the North Tower, 1 World Trade Center, collapsed at 10:28 a.m."[...]With, its support weakened by the blast and flying debris, 7 World Trade Center collapsed at approximately 5:20 p.m."
so his absence in providing the standard information concerning a fourth building failure within two days can be seen as his attempt to minimize the event's significance.

But this report isn't coming to light in a vacuum. I recently became aware of different mention of a contradictory second-day collapse event found in the official record, located in a pdf document maintained at the "old" site,

Here the collapse is described as being of "another building within the World Trade Center Complex," which can only mean to reference one of the buildings, numbered WTC 1 through WTC 7, which were all destroyed on 9/11. The 1 Liberty Plaza address is distinct from the WTC "complex" address---with "plaza" being the exclusive denotation. So for factual telling rendered in highly bureaucratic legalese, this doesn't seem to be within a margin of error.

The document is titled "Office of Emergency Preparedness, Situation Report #7," dated "September 15, 2001 1200 Eastern," and it also makes for gripping narrative reading
"Shortly after 1000 hours the south tower of the World Center collapsed. Within the next half-hour, the northern tower of the World Trade Center also collapsed.

"At approximately 1730 hours a third tower in the World Trade Center complex, Building #7, also collapsed.

"Wednesday evening, September 12, another building within the World Trade Center Complex collapsed. No additional casualties are expected due to this. However, it may make recovery more difficult."
Here the collapse is more specifically defined as having occurred on Wednesday evening---but in a context where even the broad act of shutting down mass transit below 14th Street is specified to the very minute---9:03 a.m. on the eleventh---it is strange to find a euphemism employed to describe such a traumatic event. Even if only "partial," a collapse of any part of a 64-story steel-frame building would have been unprecedented in the annuals of building safety only 36 hours earlier.

Also note Kerik's differentiation between the "total destruction" of the two tallest towers, and the rest of the complex
"In addition to the total destruction of 1 and 2 World Trade Center...buildings 3, 5 and 7 World Trade Center were also destroyed."
If I were to make any distinction here, I would have lumped Buildings 1, 2, 3 and 7 together, as they were all reduced to piles of rubble, while buildings 4, 5 and 6 remained recognizable standing in situ.

But there is a fuller context here, which must be addressed.

In December of 2008, Peter Duveen posted online, the hard copies of several newspaper articles published in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, which were completely unknown by either reference or citation in the ancillary record of the attacks---the burgeoning industry that grew up to explain holes in the narrative, what is known collectively as "the 9/11 truth movement."

Several of the articles disclose information impossible to reconcile with details of the official narrative. It is my belief that an organized and long-established system of suppressing such inconvenient facts, which find their way into mainstream media outlets, was employed by governmental powers-that-be assisted by willing helpers, to prevent the maintenance, transfer and recovery of such information for review.

Foremost amongst these, is an article by Jennifer Steinhauer published in the New York Times on September 13, 2001, As Remnants Collapse, Workers Run For Cover, which describes "the steel and concrete wreckage of the south tower" as falling about 5 p.m. on Wednesday the 12th. This caused a "rolling pillar of smoke," similar I would imagine, to the traumatic scenes of pyroclastic dust clouds we recollect from September 11th.

Making Kerik's assertion manifestly bizarre is the fact that Steinhauer specifically addresses concerns about the safety of 1 Liberty Plaza in her article
"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."
Whatever happened downtown around five o'clock on Wednesday afternoon should have been clarified over two weeks later when Kerik was writing up his report. This mixing up of the rumored, the feared, and the suspected with news reports of actual events is a classic dis-information technique to muddy the waters.

Other anecdotal evidence exists, especially in the fire department oral histories, which supports the factual legitimacy of this second-day collapse event at the South Tower, as reported in the New York Times, and I go into that in a blog elsewhere. But at heart, is the added power and weight given the information found in the Steinhauer article through its having lain fallow for over seven years, as an alternative narrative developed. We can judge the sudden reappearance of these facts as having a revelatory impact.

The Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Public Health Service Office of Emergency Preparedness, Emergency Operations Center, Rockville, Maryland, Terrorist Attacks: New York City, NY: World Trade Center Towers; Washington D.C.: The Pentagon: U.S. Department of Defense; Summerset County, PA: Air Plane Crash, Situational Report # 7, was an anonymously drafted, in-house agency document, which was never meant to see the light of public day. If it turns out to be not fraudulent---and we must always leave open that possibility---then the information in it can be judged as likely free from a taint by political or conspiratorial agendas. To me it reads like the technical rendering of some basic facts put out by a narrow segment of federal agency responding to an anticipated terrorist-attack scenario.

Other facts in the document appear notable too. Concerning the recovery of the physical remains of passengers at the Flight 93 crash site in Pennsylvania, the OEP says
"This is the first time that a DMORT [Defense Department Mortuary Affairs Team] will be assisting in this capacity with an FBI investigation."
Why was not the broadest federal agency response undertaken in this case? President Clinton had signed a law into effect in 1995 making the FBI not just the lead, but the "sole," agency to investigate acts of domestic "terrorism." That didn't change the law mandating a county medical examiner to maintain the records and a chain of custody for the corpses of victims however.

The same scenario played out at the Pentagon too, giving custody and control for both the military and Flight 77 passenger victims to the Defense Department, with the Arlington County medical examiner going on record stating that she was ready, willing and able to provide her lawful services---thereby implying something was irregular in the action. Commonsense tells me that by narrowing down the cast of participants in any situation, the chance for collusion and corruption grows.

Even within established protocols, such as those supposedly followed by the New York City medical examiner's office responding to victims in lower Manhattan, room can exist for a fundamental flouting of the rules. The recovery of the bodies of high-ranking officials such as Chief Ganci and Commissioner Feehan are shrouded in secrecy, with anomalous and irreconcilable details in the record. Both bodies were said to have been recovered late in the day on the 11th, and were transported together in the same fire department ambulance to their homes out on Long Island. Neither of the men had an open casket funeral, but this is a story for a future blog.

Also saved for the future, is a discussion of what this all implies. We have extensive photographic and video evidence from the 11th and 12th, for instance, that clearly shows no such building remains for tower 2.

No comments:

Post a Comment